Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Snipping at that point to spare a wall of needless text.

What is the point of being AFK and anything? You are not actively playing the game as far as making any effort, you can simply observe events and if you do see something, you have the option to react to it.
Keeping firmly in mind, the player needs to be present in order to make such an observation.

It is my understanding that the observant players are the ones who are feared, so let's keep it simple like that.

You could claim this is not playing the game, due to a lack of effort involved.
After all, you are apparently doing nothing more than watching your screen, possibly in the event something happens for you to react to.

Now, let's just flip that over. In addition to the PvE tasks themselves, which players in high sec already do quite often, what does the PvE player in null need to do?

What is the point of bothering with intel with Local? You are not actively playing the game as far as making any effort to gather intelligence, you can simply observe the chat roster, and if you do see something, you have the option to react to it.
Keeping firmly in mind, the player needs to be present in order to look at the Local Chat pilot roster.

It is my understanding that the observant players are the ones who do the fearing, so let's keep it simple like that.

You could claim this is not playing the game intended for null, due to lack of effort involved.
After all, you are apparently doing nothing more than watching your screen, possibly in the event something happens for you to react to.

---

I dunno, sounds like both sides are pretty evenly matched. Most would consider this balanced.

Did you want to change this?

As with any change to a carefully balanced system, even with seemingly broken aspects like this has, you need to modify both sides of the equation to keep them equal.

This is an impossibility, if you are afk you can't attack someone, if you are cloaked you cannot attack someone.

my apology for missing the "semi-afk" that statement implied.

Semi-AFK or not it is still an impossibility

Why don't you go to 'hell' and post there?

Um, I'm sorry but you may want to familiarize yourself with basic EVE mechanics before you go calling someone a troll. It is literally impossible to activate modules while cloaked, and therefor impossible to kill someone, or light a cyno, or anything else.

Ok so here is the situation...the outcry for anit-cloaking is about as old as miners for invincibility. The fact of the matter is, not EVERYTHING in eve needs a counter measure against it. There is such a thing as too much balance. Players need to feel they have some avenue of a tactical advantage over each other. Lets name some modules that have counter measures shall we?

1. ECM - ECCM, ECM Burst....the list is long for countering
2. Weapons - LOL thats what defensive mods are for.
3. Webs - Afterburners and MWD

So, from just 3 so far what have we learned? That when CCP puts in a module(s) that affect any type of direct confrontation with another player, there is most likely a way to counter it or some type of anti-whatever.

However, the cloaking device is NOT a direct confrontational module. The entire intent and purpose is to gather intel and move covertly. Let me ask you another way, if local did not exist...could you tell there were a cloaked vessel in system? The whole point of being covert is so no one knows you are there or finds you.

Cloaks have massive advantages; however, their drawbacks are just as massive.

1. Standard cloaks reduce a ship's speed dramatically and force them to uncloak to warp.
2. Covert cloaks can only be fit to covert ships that often times are pretty weak tank wise.
3. You CAN decloak someone within 2km
4. In known space they show up in local despite being cloaked. Kinda gives away the whole being covert bit eh?

Again...the list of cons is just as massive as pros. In a way, pilots who use cloaks are implementing anti-cloaking techniques on themselves everytime they use them. If you want to decloak someone...I suggest you actively play the game and do it.

The only harm an AFK cloaker can do to you is gather intel, you should probably take measures to counterman them by setting up fields of cans around gates and stations to decloak them.

If players insist on misusing a chat channel as a source of intel, it is fair and balanced for a counter to exist that reduces the value of this intel.

Since that intel is an absolute, never failing to report the presence of any pilot flying in any ship within the system, it also stands that the counter needs to match this degree of absolute presence.

This is why cloaked vessels cannot be located.

If you insist on changing one side of an absolute equation, the other must also be equally affected.

Regardless of any claims or wishes, and no matter how broken, the current system is balanced.

I don't give a damn if you're Chribba or Shadoo, I don't care which box you put yourself in, nor do I care what label you put on that box. If your thinking is flawed, then I will call it so.

What you said was "They are present. They could launch an attack anytime. I think that's interacting". You used that to justify the premise that "The problem is that a cloaked ship is an indefinite threat that can be uphold without even playing".

Consider this slight modification: "The problem is that a docked ship is an indefinite threat that can be upheld without even playing."

The same flawed reasoning applies here. I can dock up my ship and walk away from my computer. If some hostile player comes into my system (whether cloaky or not) I am there posing a threat to them, and I'm not having to work for that either.

So when you say "It's about balancing the game styles of the players and requiring the same actions from both sides", you seem to have failed to notice that both sides are in fact already balanced.

Cloaking is a tactical advantage and tactical advantages kill things. Ever got stabbed in the back? Tactical advantage.

Now stop arguing semantics.