These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#81 - 2013-01-03 21:23:55 UTC
Mikhael Taron wrote:
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.

This is accurate regarding nothing needing to be done. The system is in balance, regardless of all complaints that it makes the lives of certain pilots difficult.

Now, regarding the complainers:
On one side, you have the care bear contingent. They consider local to be normal, but the counter to local which is AFK cloaking to be unfair.
They protest in favor of removing the obstacles to what is effectively risk free gameplay for them, where they DO make significant profit.
I submit that this is risk free, in that local allows the opportunity to leave unprotected space for the shelter of a POS or outpost in the event a hostile ship enters the system. And attentive pilot can warp instantly, if they are aligned and prepared.

On the other side you have pilots who would like to do more with cloaking, but are absolutely blocked by being outed whenever they dare enter a system. To the inhabitants of a system, the cloak has no effect on whether they become aware of a hostile ship entering their space. They instantly know regardless of the cloak.
Some of these are satisfied with the meta game referred to as AFK Cloaking, so they don't mind too much.

Now, if the care bear contingent wants change, the cloaking contingent will insist it be balanced, and not a nerf of cloaking altogether.
This usually doesn't go over very well, as the care bears aren't interested in PvP at all, they just want safe and secure on their terms.

With balance currently present, I can state with fair conviction that the PvE experience won't become less dangerous under changes that remain balanced, and the care bear side do not want to accept this.
RoAnnon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2013-01-03 22:36:44 UTC  |  Edited by: RoAnnon
It's all about perception. If you know someone's there, but can't find them, that's a threat. If you don't know they're there, you don't know to feel threatened. If local is removed so you don't know the cloaky is there, the threat isn't removed, just the perception of it. Of course, a ship with an AFK pilot is no danger to anyone, cloaked or not.

Folks need to get over the fact that the way others play EVE can pull them out of their comfort zones. Go live in a wormhole for a while. Lack of local there isn't really an issue, just learn to use dscan.. a LOT.

So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter.

Broadcast4Reps

Eve Vegas 2015 Pub Crawl Group 9

Houston EVE Meet

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#83 - 2013-01-03 22:45:05 UTC
RoAnnon wrote:
It's all about perception. If you know someone's there, but can't find them, that's a threat. If you don't know they're there, you don't know to feel threatened. If local is removed so you don't know the cloaky is there, the threat isn't removed, just the perception of it. Of course, a ship with an AFK pilot is no danger to anyone, cloaked or not.

Folks need to get over the fact that the way others play EVE can pull the out of their comfort zones. Go live in a wormhole for a while. Lack of local there isn't really an issue, just learn to use dscan.. a LOT.

I actually liked the time I spent in a WH... If it had not been for the lack of outposts and market access, I would have considered it ideal.

Markets, and a place to put my stuff in a hangar. (Nope, POS's just don't cut it... I need a couch and my burrito synthesizer to be comfy somewhere....)
I never knew how many were in system with me. I only knew if they weren't looking in the right place at the right time, they would never know I was there either.

It was like being in space.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#84 - 2013-01-04 02:03:26 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

This is accurate regarding nothing needing to be done. The system is in balance, regardless of all complaints that it makes the l
...
With balance currently present, I can state with fair conviction that the PvE experience won't become less dangerous under changes that remain balanced, and the care bear side do not want to accept this.

A good discussion of the psychology involved, and I have one thing to say: and people wonder why nullsec is deserted. Meh.

Back to the suggestion, removed cloaked/inactive ships from local. This benefits both groups immensely. The cloakers can now use cloaking offensively to attack a pilot with inadequate vigilance, and the nullbears still have enough of an intel tool to stay safe- if they bother to use it. Sounds fair to me.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2013-01-04 02:31:52 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

This is accurate regarding nothing needing to be done. The system is in balance, regardless of all complaints that it makes the l
...
With balance currently present, I can state with fair conviction that the PvE experience won't become less dangerous under changes that remain balanced, and the care bear side do not want to accept this.

A good discussion of the psychology involved, and I have one thing to say: and people wonder why nullsec is deserted. Meh.

Back to the suggestion, removed cloaked/inactive ships from local. This benefits both groups immensely. The cloakers can now use cloaking offensively to attack a pilot with inadequate vigilance, and the nullbears still have enough of an intel tool to stay safe- if they bother to use it. Sounds fair to me.

But also the cloaked/inactive vessel should not be able to see local. Creating a well balanced system.

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

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#86 - 2013-01-04 14:48:02 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Ines Tegator wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

This is accurate regarding nothing needing to be done. The system is in balance, regardless of all complaints that it makes the l
...
With balance currently present, I can state with fair conviction that the PvE experience won't become less dangerous under changes that remain balanced, and the care bear side do not want to accept this.

A good discussion of the psychology involved, and I have one thing to say: and people wonder why nullsec is deserted. Meh.

Back to the suggestion, removed cloaked/inactive ships from local. This benefits both groups immensely. The cloakers can now use cloaking offensively to attack a pilot with inadequate vigilance, and the nullbears still have enough of an intel tool to stay safe- if they bother to use it. Sounds fair to me.

But also the cloaked/inactive vessel should not be able to see local. Creating a well balanced system.

Agreed, and I suspect Ines Tegator would not object to this detail.

The argument that the care bears have been avoiding, is the point where survival in low or null SHOULD require more effort than casually monitoring the pilot roster in local chat.

The current level of effort needed for successful vigilance is trivial, considering local has absolute flawless and instant updates on every pilot present in system. THAT is why AFK Cloaking occurs the way it does.
They are openly care-bearing in space intended to be defended by group efforts, and this mechanic makes it easy for them.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2013-01-05 03:16:11 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
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.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2410259#post241025
lol Friday, warfare and tactics got it this time.

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

Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#88 - 2013-01-05 04:07:35 UTC
Nullsec is already differentiated from highsec by a lack of CONCORD response, gate guns, the enablement of bombs and bubbles, and the lack of security adjustments for hostile actions. Removing local would make it one step closer to W-Space which, well, you can go to W-Space for that experience. It also empowers stealth players, when the point of this thread is that they are already too powerful.

Firstly, they are unassailable. A cloaky that does not wish to be caught can never be removed. For all the time and money and effort that goes into taking and holding sov, any and all hostiles that succeed in entering a system with a cloaking device can permanently occupy it

Local is a powerful tool, but not a perfect one. It does not, by itself clearly indicate the difference between a logoff and an exit (through gate or wormhole). It also does not disclose ship type or equipment, location or activity. The only thing it gives you is knowledge that a pilot is present in the system, and is evident, often that knowledge is detrimental in the face of the advantages an AFK cloaky holds.

Next, they have the ultimate initiative. As covert recons can warp undetected, they can safely view any and all ships on warpable grid locations and determine likelihood that said ships are bait, taking as long as they want picking out targets given their unassailable position. Additionally, when they start hunting is independent of their presence in system- they may spend days making the locals accustomed to their presence and waiting for them to make an expensive mistake, and there is utterly no indication that their status changes from AFK to active.

They also are capable, like any ship, of carrying the ultimate multiplier- the cyno. Combining the ability to sit in an unassailable position with the ability to instantly multiply your numbers is what pushes cloaky hotdroppers from powerful to near overpowered... but without it, you wouldn't have black op gangs.

So that finally brings us to the psychological effect. Because a single red in system has the potential to mean everything from a stealth bomber gank to a sudden outpouring of Black Op Battleships greedy for faction kills, it can severely impact both the morale and the economy of the local residents. All that for a character with a very minimal set of skills- it doesn't necessarily have to have all the skills either, some of your AFK cloaky campers can be bluffs. The barrier to entry is incredibly low and cheap, while the effect is massive. There is no better result for your money. Every nullsec operating entitty in EVE worth their salt should have legions of these characters deployed to every single system of their enemy.

I'd like to hear the arguments that assert that is a balanced situation.

I liked the idea that the cloaking ship cannot see local, but it is easily overcome with another alt, or just by uncloaking (nobody knows when to expect that) when you're active for a quick peek. It also means that the cloaking device will become the most popular wildcard slot item in the whole of EVE- you can cloak entire defensive fleets not just from scan, but from local, while scouts provide eyes and ears.

I'm in agreement with people who say that cloaky ships are balanced and, as already stated, there are plenty of loopholes that make being unable to be removed from a system something that won't go away, so attempts to 'balance' cloaking is entirely pointless. What remains is to take away the multiplicative effect of a hot-dropping cloaky, but as previously indicated, that would eliminate the existence of black op gangs, so by itself, that's not a starter.

So that culminates in identifying that the time element is also a critical factor. It's not that they can cloak and hot-drop, but that they can do so without warning after extensive periods of inactivity. That's what really takes the biscuit. And from there, the solution is obvious- there should be a temporal element to cynos.

Honestly, it doesn't change the game much except for entirely eliminating AFK hot-droppers. Locals still have to be wary of new reds that appear, or stealth bomber ganks, but the counters are far simpler (fly in pairs, for example) and the impact much less severe. Black Ops gangs can still occur, but not off the back of an AFK (or otherwise) camper- they must transition and reveal their activity, and use it or lose it.

To clarify the mechanic- it's like the suspect flag. Logging off and on will not reset it, only passing through a gate. You don't get a cheap workaround like that.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#89 - 2013-01-05 05:00:19 UTC
just arrived from the "defenses against cloaking" thread. I am a bit undecided if i should give "fix cloackers" a try but the typo scares me a bit.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#90 - 2013-01-05 22:26:32 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
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.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2410259#post241025
lol Friday, warfare and tactics got it this time.


Son of ****!!

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

Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#91 - 2013-01-06 01:07:41 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

But also the cloaked/inactive vessel should not be able to see local. Creating a well balanced system.

Agreed, and I suspect Ines Tegator would not object to this detail.

The argument that the care bears have been avoiding, is the point where survival in low or null SHOULD require more effort than casually monitoring the pilot roster in local chat.

The current level of effort needed for successful vigilance is trivial, considering local has absolute flawless and instant updates on every pilot present in system. THAT is why AFK Cloaking occurs the way it does.
They are openly care-bearing in space intended to be defended by group efforts, and this mechanic makes it easy for them.


I have one issue with it, and that's the primary purpose of cloaking is to gather intel safely. They already pay the price by being unable to act while cloaked. Regardless, it's way too easy to work around- just uncloak at a safe spot for a few seconds and you have your intel. Actually, come to think of it while writing that, this may be just the thing, since it forces scouts to be uncloaked while collecting continuous intel, otherwise they cant see people leave/arrive. That may be just enough of an inconvenience to make it work.

The second paragraph is the key point, and should be repeated often. Removing cloakers from local requires exactly that, but still leaves the tools required to fly safe in the hands of the pilot. A covert pilot who's awesome with his dscan has a lot more tactical options, and the ratter still has situational awareness- just with a much smaller margin for error.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#92 - 2013-01-06 01:08:46 UTC
Jessica Danikov wrote:
1>>>>
Nullsec is already differentiated from highsec by a lack of CONCORD response, gate guns, the enablement of bombs and bubbles, and the lack of security adjustments for hostile actions. Removing local would make it one step closer to W-Space which, well, you can go to W-Space for that experience. It also empowers stealth players, when the point of this thread is that they are already too powerful.

2>>>>
Firstly, they are unassailable. A cloaky that does not wish to be caught can never be removed. For all the time and money and effort that goes into taking and holding sov, any and all hostiles that succeed in entering a system with a cloaking device can permanently occupy it

3>>>>
Local is a powerful tool, but not a perfect one. It does not, by itself clearly indicate the difference between a logoff and an exit (through gate or wormhole). It also does not disclose ship type or equipment, location or activity. The only thing it gives you is knowledge that a pilot is present in the system, and is evident, often that knowledge is detrimental in the face of the advantages an AFK cloaky holds.

4>>>>
Next, they have the ultimate initiative. As covert recons can warp undetected, they can safely view any and all ships on warpable grid locations and determine likelihood that said ships are bait, taking as long as they want picking out targets given their unassailable position. Additionally, when they start hunting is independent of their presence in system- they may spend days making the locals accustomed to their presence and waiting for them to make an expensive mistake, and there is utterly no indication that their status changes from AFK to active.

5>>>>
They also are capable, like any ship, of carrying the ultimate multiplier- the cyno. Combining the ability to sit in an unassailable position with the ability to instantly multiply your numbers is what pushes cloaky hotdroppers from powerful to near overpowered... but without it, you wouldn't have black op gangs.

6>>>>
So that finally brings us to the psychological effect. Because a single red in system has the potential to mean everything from a stealth bomber gank to a sudden outpouring of Black Op Battleships greedy for faction kills, it can severely impact both the morale and the economy of the local residents. All that for a character with a very minimal set of skills- it doesn't necessarily have to have all the skills either, some of your AFK cloaky campers can be bluffs. The barrier to entry is incredibly low and cheap, while the effect is massive. There is no better result for your money. Every nullsec operating entitty in EVE worth their salt should have legions of these characters deployed to every single system of their enemy.

7>>>>
I'd like to hear the arguments that assert that is a balanced situation.

8>>>>
I liked the idea that the cloaking ship cannot see local, but it is easily overcome with another alt, or just by uncloaking (nobody knows when to expect that) when you're active for a quick peek. It also means that the cloaking device will become the most popular wildcard slot item in the whole of EVE- you can cloak entire defensive fleets not just from scan, but from local, while scouts provide eyes and ears.

9>>>>
I'm in agreement with people who say that cloaky ships are balanced and, as already stated, there are plenty of loopholes that make being unable to be removed from a system something that won't go away, so attempts to 'balance' cloaking is entirely pointless. What remains is to take away the multiplicative effect of a hot-dropping cloaky, but as previously indicated, that would eliminate the existence of black op gangs, so by itself, that's not a starter.

10>>>>
So that culminates in identifying that the time element is also a critical factor. It's not that they can cloak and hot-drop, but that they can do so without warning after extensive periods of inactivity. That's what really takes the biscuit. And from there, the solution is obvious- there should be a temporal element to cynos.

Honestly, it doesn't change the game much except for entirely eliminating AFK hot-droppers. Locals still have to be wary of new reds that appear, or stealth bomber ganks, but the counters are far simpler (fly in pairs, for example) and the impact much less severe. Black Ops gangs can still occur, but not off the back of an AFK (or otherwise) camper- they must transition and reveal their activity, and use it or lose it.

To clarify the mechanic- it's like the suspect flag. Logging off and on will not reset it, only passing through a gate. You don't get a cheap workaround like that.

Holy wall-of-text, batman!

1<<<<
The amusing suggestion that WH space is identical to null with the exception of local, dang you nailed it. Are you sure about that?

2<<<<
AFK Cloaking is a counter, to the flawless intel you don't bother getting about the system you supposedly defend. If you actually have defenses present, you laugh at AFK Cloaking, as it relies on PvE ships being undefended to even suggest the possibility of a threat.

3<<<<
Local being flawed by not giving details only a DEV or GM should have. I must remember the moment expectations were placed this way.
As to the AFK Cloaky causing a flaw in Local's intel quality, that is the whole point of it. Without this artificial flaw, it is perfect enough for PvE pilots to use it in order to avoid ALL threats with a minimum of preparation.
Few call this balanced, without benefiting from it directly.

NEXT POST
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#93 - 2013-01-06 01:09:13 UTC
4<<<<
The coverts have the initiative. Give me a moment here, as this statement is so disingenuous that it makes me wonder if it came from an alternate reality.
The moment ANY covert / cloaked vessel entered the system, all threatened assets got safe. This means they are not IN space to be seen by the cloaked vessel. Sure, if they are in a POS, the cloaking ship might get on grid to see what is being flown, but that's all.
Any ship not 'safed up' is operating with explicit awareness of a hostile in system. As this behavior is radically different from the normal risk averse PvE attitude cloakers normally encounter, it kinda stands out.

5<<<<
Cloaky hot droppers, minus the hot dropping, are powerful? These are the same ships that are balanced to have a cloak, and as a result are popularly acknowledged as being weaker than their counterparts. Combat vs Force recons being the obvious comparison.
Now, a certain philosophy says ALL ships are powerful. Even a noob ship can get on a kill mail with it's civilian guns undr the right conditions...
Black Op gangs, as opposed to the titan bridged ones, are not showing up on any fleet fittings for combat ops any time soon.
They simply are not preferrable over their T1 counterparts in a fight, or cost effective.

6<<<<
Did we put out recruiting posters for AFK Cloaking too? Reminds me of the CCP video narratives boasting of play aspects unique to eve.
Like most recruiting posters, the exxagerations are over the top.
After all, PvE pilots in null sec always run and display risk averse behavior patterns.
There are no fleets, ever, for cooperative defense.
All PvE pilots fly solo, and rely exclusively on local chat for their defense needs.
There are never scouts or gate camps protecting areas where PvE happens.
Heck, while you are at it, take a speed roam to the heart of an enemy alliance and wipe out their economic divisions...

7<<<<
Request granted.
See other points...

8<<<<
Overcome by another alt? Guess who will be hunted since they are not cloaked! Sounds balanced!
Uncloaking to see local? Slightly idiotic to broadcast your presence that way, now you can be hunted due to cloaking delay before use is possible. Many scanning experts claim success in far less time, and this ignores the possibility of cloaked hunting capability. (you just shot up a flare to be hunted, FYI)
The other bits, cloaks being wildcard items despite penalties, defensive fleets hidden in systems... these sound like good exciting things to be hoped for.

9<<<<
Hot Dropping is a topic for another thread. It is an incentive against local for the same reason AFK Cloaking is, since it is only practical as a result of local. This is specifically hot dropping, and not other cyno usage in general. If a regular cyno is deployed, covert or normal, local broadcasts the new presence immediately.

10<<<<
AFK Cloaking is established by players as an improvised counter to Local Chat's flawless qualities as a source of intel.
ANY change that ignores the reason for it's existance fails logical reasoning, and will not ultimately resolve anything.

Null and local exist to reward group effort. High sec allows for significant solo play.
Using local chat as an intel source, the PvE pilots are able to bypass needing group effort in order to reap the rewards of any system with low rates of travel.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#94 - 2013-01-06 01:12:15 UTC
Jessica Danikov wrote:
It also means that the cloaking device will become the most popular wildcard slot item in the whole of EVE- you can cloak entire defensive fleets not just from scan, but from local, while scouts provide eyes and ears.


You say that like it's a bad thing...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#95 - 2013-01-06 01:13:33 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

But also the cloaked/inactive vessel should not be able to see local. Creating a well balanced system.

Agreed, and I suspect Ines Tegator would not object to this detail.

The argument that the care bears have been avoiding, is the point where survival in low or null SHOULD require more effort than casually monitoring the pilot roster in local chat.

The current level of effort needed for successful vigilance is trivial, considering local has absolute flawless and instant updates on every pilot present in system. THAT is why AFK Cloaking occurs the way it does.
They are openly care-bearing in space intended to be defended by group efforts, and this mechanic makes it easy for them.


I have one issue with it, and that's the primary purpose of cloaking is to gather intel safely. They already pay the price by being unable to act while cloaked. Regardless, it's way too easy to work around- just uncloak at a safe spot for a few seconds and you have your intel.

Recloaking has a built in delay period of 30 seconds.

Many scanning experts claim the ability to locate a ship in far less time than that.
Add to this, the expectation that the ability to hunt cloaked ships will be included with changes that remove cloaked vessels from local.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#96 - 2013-01-06 01:20:29 UTC
Jessica Danikov wrote:
So that finally brings us to the psychological effect. Because a single red in system has the potential to mean everything from a stealth bomber gank to a sudden outpouring of Black Op Battleships greedy for faction kills, it can severely impact both the morale and the economy of the local residents. All that for a character with a very minimal set of skills- it doesn't necessarily have to have all the skills either, some of your AFK cloaky campers can be bluffs. The barrier to entry is incredibly low and cheap, while the effect is massive. There is no better result for your money. Every nullsec operating entitty in EVE worth their salt should have legions of these characters deployed to every single system of their enemy.

I'd like to hear the arguments that assert that is a balanced situation.
It is just as trivial to defeat as it is to install.
It is the only counter to an utterly broken intel tool.
ROI is pretty much completely decoupled from balance.

Take your pick.
Valea Silpha
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#97 - 2013-01-06 04:23:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Valea Silpha
People hanging out cloaked in your carebearing systems is a legitimate form of attack. They indirectly hurt the economy and will to fight of their enemies. They sometimes even do so directly, but their real power is inspiring fear.

There should be no-where in eve that you can totally perfectly lock down. You are not allowed that kind of safety, and definitely not in 0.0.

Messing with the cloaking system to any degree would be not just a 'no more afk cloakers LOL' thing, it would radically effect game balance across almost all areas. Cloaked scouts are a massive factor in all scales of conflict. If you add a counter to AFK cloaked guys, you add a counter to very active, very critical scouts.

Now maybe that's a good thing. But is it really worth totally changing the nature of pvp in eve (by nerfing scouts) to let miners and plex runners both of whom should know better feel even safer than they already mostly are. I don't think it is. If CCP wants to change how cloaks work as a whole, then I'll listen to them, but they should change it because of the BIG things about cloaking not because of a tiny niggle.

Edit -

It turns out that when you live in 0.0 there is a very real chance someone may at some point shoot at you. You can mitigate that somewhat... You set up camps and bubbles and whatnot all over the place, with scouts in every system so you always know if people are coming. So called AFK cloakers get around the fact that they seldom if ever can do much damage (they can take on very very few ships solo) by messing with your mind. If your mind is all thats being messed with, consider yourself lucky.
Huijgen
Unknown Union
Unknown Holding Alliance
#98 - 2013-01-06 19:25:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Huijgen
I don't have any issue with cloaking. Or people bothering you in null. Also hotdropping, its a part of the game.

But camping certain area's for weeks and weeks more, hoping to get nice kills ( hotdrop ). Eventually getting them
because people are being denied there right to play this nice game.

U can say whatever u want about it but the fact of the matter is that these mechanics arn't fair. There is not
a single way to catch an ''afk'' cloaker.

So why not give cloaking ships having to need Fuel. I don't know for 12 hours + for all i care. This means
that they eventually have to travel. And that on itsself means you can counteract. Catch them at gates.
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#99 - 2013-01-06 19:30:18 UTC
just remove the cloaked from local.. the AFK cannot do anything to you ..

  - 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]

Kestrix
Gallente Federation Private Members Club.
#100 - 2013-01-06 20:31:36 UTC
I don't want to see cloaked vessels nerfed. Leave them as they are, leave local as it is. I would be happy if CCP provided us with a device that does nothing other than detect what type of cloaking device is in effect in a system. It does not give away the cloaked vessels location or what it is, only that it's using a covert ops cloaking device or the Improved cloaking device II. It gives me an idea of what the vessel is capable of. I'd be happy with that.