Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Because his idea will force easy PVP kills.
It's basically the equivalent of me running a shop, and worrying about thieves so I install an alarm. Nikk then comes up and says he runs shops too, but they should be a challenge, so he votes to ban alarms, because really, he wants to rob shops.

It's clear his intent is to make easy PvP kills from PVE players. If it wasn't he would see why his idea is ******** from the point of view of "a challenge".
Your problem is that you're so busy licking his starfish that you take everything he says as pure fact with no ulterior motive.

Really?

I am here to promote easy PvE kills?

You analogy is horrible.

If you want to challenge a point, feel free to do it, but in your conspiracy theory beliefs I am apparently one of the dark lords of cloaking, here to pave my dominion with your kill mails.

Come to the dark side, Lucas.... we have cookies.

All you have done is promote ideas to make PVE ships more vulnerable to PVP, name one that has not?

There is solid evidence that PVP in null works just fine, I know I'm often at the sharp edge of it, however, there is much more to null sec then PVP.... much more, all your arguments seem to point to the fact that you cant work with the mechanics and turn them to your advantage, instead you want the game to change to suit you!

well actually this whole thread was started buy techos, to solve the AFK cyno problem buy completely re-writing the basics of EVE... even though we all know its got a snowballs chance in hell.

Ah, your claim is lacking any context to the request for cloaked ships to be nerfed.

I too agree that it is working just fine.

But if our happy friends want changes to benefit themselves, then I see no reason to unbalance the game against my interests, particularly since they imply they are championing players like myself as their cause.
Balance dictates that the game maintains equal aspects, not shifting them.

You already have a chance. You just aren't good enough to make good use of those chances. You are trying to increase those chances to make it easier to secure the pve kills. I promise you that blinding pve ships to the approach of the stealth bomber until it appears on grid next you the pve ship and instantly locks and points it will increase the chance to a virtual guarantee between 0.95 and 1, which is essentially 100% chance of getting the point, cyno and kill, for those less knowledgeable in decimal representation of percentages.

If anything, talk about blinding people to local drastically increases the problem with afk cloaky and with all cloaky hunters versus pve, and therefore creates an even bigger issue with the afk cloaky problem by expanding it to be the cloaky problem and even to become the pve problem. So it takes a thread aimed to address the problem and suggests that the best solution is to make the problem much worse.

So I suggestion we focus more on auto-logoff and limitations on cyno fitting with cloak and point/bubble.

Exactly right.

If you come to this sub-forum and whine for a cloaking nerf so you can get MORE PvE you are asking for something for yourself, a buff for you and a nerf for the other side of the equation...in which case you have to replace the equality with a (strict) inequality.

If PvE = PvP is the current state. Then you whine, moan and ***** for a nerf to just cloaks (and lets be clear almost all of these ideas nerf even active cloakers, especially fuel requirements, timers, and capacitor drain) then it becomes:

PvE > PvP.

That is unbalanced.

To argue otherwise is just mother ****ing ********.

So your only argument left is to say that:

PvE < PvP, thereby justifying the nerf to cloaks.

But the arguments for this are often weak. For example, claiming the cloaked ship is totally safe is only true so long as the cloak is active which also means...YOU are totally safe too. Plus, you know the guy is there in system and is cloaked...or with a bit of work you can determine this. And there are ways to handle situations where the guy is AFK:

1. Moving a system or two over.
2. PvE in a group in PvP fit ships (I'd love to see a KM where 5 guys in PvP ships were dropped and losses were incurred).
3. Note when guy obtains any kills and avoid PvE during those times.
4. Simply stay docked and wait them out (yes, a bad option hence its position in the list).

Another argument is, "Well he might have a cyno...." Yes, he might. But here is the thing, the range on a BLOPs bridge is limited. Open the in game map and see if you can find a system that could be where the rest of the BLOPs fleet is located. If every system looks empty and that guy camping your system has been there all day...chances are good he wont be cynoing in a bunch of guys (note I said good, not 100%--that is, yes they could all be on team speak, and the BLOPs guys log in and bypass the in game maps reporting).

And again, similar arguments can be used as noted above...move over a few systems, see if the guy follows you. Do your PvE in a group with PvP ships. Look up the guys KB stats, see when they tend to be active.

Are any of these sure fire ways of defeating a BLOPs gang, no. But should there be a way to ensure yourself 100% certainty? Generally speaking, not in null. Or if there is 100% it should afford the people who have that 100% certainty very, very few game play options.

Oh and thank for the bump Andy!

In that case, the requested changes would not affect the genuine AFK pilot.

They won't be there to care whether they have been disconnected.

But the pilot who IS monitoring the activity in a system, which is clearly a legitimate use of cloaking, he WILL be negatively affected.

As a secondary, (but no less important), effect, the active cloaked players will be harmed by isolating them as being active.
The proven ability to fool some players, excepting the ones who clearly posted here they are never fooled, will be diminished to the point of trivialty.

This makes PvE easier, as you will KNOW that any hostile listed pretty much HAS to be active, killing any chance you might undock in a ship they have any chance of attacking.

It is a nerf.

Andy,

No. I have explained how the system I advocate would eliminate AFK cloaking. If you want to know how it would work, go read those posts.