These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK Cloaking Collection Thread

First post First post
Author
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3241 - 2013-11-28 11:51:11 UTC
I tell you what, lets try to stay on track. So what you guys are all saying is that its. Impossible (not unfavourable but actually impossible) to remove afk cloaking without removing local?

so since local will never be removed, we can only conclude that afk cloaking can never be fixed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#3242 - 2013-11-28 12:43:27 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I tell you what, lets try to stay on track. So what you guys are all saying is that its. Impossible (not unfavourable but actually impossible) to remove afk cloaking without removing local?

so since local will never be removed, we can only conclude that afk cloaking can never be fixed.


Good thing we can close this horribly derailed rant now

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#3243 - 2013-11-28 12:53:28 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Let's just settle this argument that afk cloakers exist because of local nonsense once and for all.
Yes let's. What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?
Correlation does not imply causation.

What that means is, the fact that removing local would stop the issue does not mean local is the cause of the issue.
Do you shoot yourself in the foot often?
Seriously? So you too read a clear statement of correlation and assume causation, then assume that means I'm wrong? Did you guys all get up on the stupid side of the bed this morning?

How can it possibly be the cause if fixes can be implemented without changing local?
I asked a simple question, one that you avoided answering I might add. I'm simply going on the facts that you yourself agree on. The fact that if you remove local, AFK cloaking is pointless. Pointless in the regard to which this discussion is based. I say that because we are not just talking about someone going AFK for a toilet break, it's about psychological warfare.

I had a jump clone in 0.0 a while back, it had some +4 implants in it and I also had quite a few items in that station. Now it had been a long time since the corp I was in, was in possession of that station. But for ***** and giggles I would jump to it now and again and sit in the station all red and -10, just to play with those in the system. Can you guess which mechanic I was using to cause pilots problems there? I'll give you a hint, it was the same mechanic they all complained to me with and told me to leave in.

So no amount of nerfing cloaks would have helped those pilots in that regard.
So rather that retorting to personal attacks, of which you seem far to eager to do, please answer the simple question I asked.

What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?

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

Mag's
Azn Empire
#3244 - 2013-11-28 12:59:47 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I tell you what, lets try to stay on track. So what you guys are all saying is that its. Impossible (not unfavourable but actually impossible) to remove afk cloaking without removing local?

so since local will never be removed, we can only conclude that afk cloaking can never be fixed.
Local may go, it may stay but the intel it provides could be decoupled. No one knows, including you. But no one here with any sense of balance, would advocate the complete removal of local, without it being as part of a package of changes. That package may include ways to gain the intel in a different way and the ability to find cloaked ships. It's not just about removing local. You know this of course, but that fact like others, doesn't seem all that important to you.

Oh and for the record, I like the status quo.

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

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3245 - 2013-11-28 16:25:20 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I asked a simple question, one that you avoided answering I might add. I'm simply going on the facts that you yourself agree on. The fact that if you remove local, AFK cloaking is pointless. Pointless in the regard to which this discussion is based. I say that because we are not just talking about someone going AFK for a toilet break, it's about psychological warfare.

I had a jump clone in 0.0 a while back, it had some +4 implants in it and I also had quite a few items in that station. Now it had been a long time since the corp I was in, was in possession of that station. But for ***** and giggles I would jump to it now and again and sit in the station all red and -10, just to play with those in the system. Can you guess which mechanic I was using to cause pilots problems there? I'll give you a hint, it was the same mechanic they all complained to me with and told me to leave in.

So no amount of nerfing cloaks would have helped those pilots in that regard.
So rather that retorting to personal attacks, of which you seem far to eager to do, please answer the simple question I asked.

What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?
When exactly did I state that removing local wouldn't fix the issue?
I think you'll find what I stated is that local would have too many side effects that would be unwelcomed, and CCP are unlikely to choose it as an option, thus it's a moot point. The fact that removing it does not make it the cause though. Removing cloaking would fix it too. AS would removing the ability to AFK. As would adding the ability to hunt a cloaker. In fact, if you read back I point out that Nikk suggests removing local, then adding an effort based system, and that effort based system reintroduces AFK cloaking as an issue, so to counter it, he suggests a hunting modules to hunt cloakers. So by Nikk's own idea, the fix for AFK cloaking isn't even his suggestion to remove local.

The thing is, I'm open to discussing suggestions from all aspects. Everyone's opinions is valid. The problem is, every time anyone suggests anything as a solution without saying "nuke local", Nikk and Teckos come in trolling them and telling them that the "only way" is to remove local. How can any reasonable discussion be had while that goes on?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#3246 - 2013-11-28 16:42:47 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
When exactly did I state that removing local wouldn't fix the issue?
When did I say you didn't say that? I did in fact quote you saying the following:
"What that means is, the fact that removing local would stop the issue......."

But if your reply was actually in regards to the post after the one you quoted, then you did say local will never be removed. I simply said local may go or it's intel may be decoupled. But no one knows, including you.

It is all in the posts above, just in case you missed it.

Lucas Kell wrote:
I think you'll find what I stated is that local would have too many side effects that would be unwelcomed, and CCP are unlikely to choose it as an option, thus it's a moot point. The fact that removing it does not make it the cause though. Removing cloaking would fix it too. AS would removing the ability to AFK. As would adding the ability to hunt a cloaker. In fact, if you read back I point out that Nikk suggests removing local, then adding an effort based system, and that effort based system reintroduces AFK cloaking as an issue, so to counter it, he suggests a hunting modules to hunt cloakers. So by Nikk's own idea, the fix for AFK cloaking isn't even his suggestion to remove local.

The thing is, I'm open to discussing suggestions from all aspects. Everyone's opinions is valid. The problem is, every time anyone suggests anything as a solution without saying "nuke local", Nikk and Teckos come in trolling them and telling them that the "only way" is to remove local. How can any reasonable discussion be had while that goes on?
But it is the underlining cause. The fact you don't need a cloak to gain the same effect, should speak volumes in this regard. This is why Nikk, Techos and others are against simply nerfing cloaks. It doesn't fix the cause.

Plus your insistence on being disingenuous about what Nikk and Teckos want, doesn't do you any credit. It just makes you look like you are the one trolling. Either pay them the courtesy of being truthful about their intentions, or don't mention them at all. They do not think the "only way" is to remove local. For someone that constantly looks for the grey areas, you do a poor job of seeing that in others arguments.

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
#3247 - 2013-11-28 16:49:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Except that one of the things has been specifically identified as causing the other.

Has it, Really?
Do you understand the word "cause"? Local intel is a way of identifying a cloaker is in local, sure, but that does not mean it's the cause.

And as specifically pointed out to Nikk, his replacement for local would not even remove AFK cloaking. In his own idea a hunting module to hunt cloakers has to be added to do that.

Uh, actually, the intel change to local would completely eliminate AFK cloaking.

Think about the requirements to AFK cloak:
1. You must be cloaked
2. You must not interact with others or the environment in a way that would betray your activity
3. Other players must be aware of your presence

Point 2 eliminates point 3 being possible, under my intel system.
Only local chat currently reveals a cloaked presence, enabling point 3. As my system removes this, it also removes AFK cloaking.

My hunting module side, in it's own thread, is a counter to ACTIVE cloaking. It is not balanced without my intel change, as it would then trivialize cloaking.

Big smile
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3248 - 2013-11-28 16:55:56 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:

First, I have never had an issue lighting a cyno so that the capital has any risk of landing outside docking range or being thrown out.


Highly unlikely, especially because this is you we are talking about.

Talk about ad hominem. Ask any competent cyno pilot about how reliably a capital can be jumped onto station with a cyno with no risk to bounce or docking distance issues. Cynoing is one of the most common professions out there so surely you must know at least one decent cyno pilot. If not, then ask around until you find an elite capital group and ask them. The fact that you can't imagine a safe station cyno raises eyebrows regarding your ideas concerning capital ships.

Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Let's just settle this argument that afk cloakers exist because of local nonsense once and for all.
Yes let's. What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?

The point is purely in the delusional beliefs of the afk cloakers that they are having a big impact on Eve without any effort. While they are not impacting the smart players very much as ops are moved to other systems, they are in fact removing some content from the Eve Universe by denying the use of a system for certain content. So the Eve Universe is hurt, but the smart players are relatively unaffected and those few less experienced players out there soon learn how to be unaffected by simply moving systems.

SO, Mag, what is the point of the predator hiding in the null sec bush (afk cloaking) when the ostrich is in high sec because it doesn't feel like putting his head in the ground out in null sec? What is the point? Because without the use of local channel, all the prey move to where their heads are not force-buried in the ground. The loss of local does not kill afk cloaking specifically, it kills all pve hunting because the hunting grounds will be drier than Mars.

Local does not force anyone to afk cloak. Local gives no reward to the afk cloaker, except the vain delusions of his own mind imagining ghost comfort with his presence, ghost tears and ghost rage.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3249 - 2013-11-28 17:22:20 UTC
Mag's wrote:
When did I say you didn't say that? I did in fact quote you saying the following:
"What that means is, the fact that removing local would stop the issue......."

But if your reply was actually in regards to the post after the one you quoted, then you did say local will never be removed. I simply said local may go or it's intel may be decoupled. But no one knows, including you.

It is all in the posts above, just in case you missed it.
By the way You seem to keep pushing the idea of local removal on me I assumed you believed I was saying it would have no effect. If that wasn;t the case, I apologise.

Mag's wrote:
But it is the underlining cause. The fact you don't need a cloak to gain the same effect, should speak volumes in this regard. This is why Nikk, Techos and others are against simply nerfing cloaks. It doesn't fix the cause.
But it's isnt the underlying cause. It isn't at all the cause. It's the main reason they can be seen, but that does not mean it is the cause. The cause of AFK cloaking is the ability to AFK safely cloaked for ever. Without that ability, AFK cloaking can never exist, no matter what other systems are in place around it. With local removed, but an effort based intel system in place, AFK cloaking remains. Like I states, even with Nikks post, a hunting modules for cloakers has to be put in place to combat AFK cloakers. Seriously, go check. So really his idea is to nerf cloaks AND remove local. The removal of local is not even the part that stops the AFK cloaking.

Mag's wrote:
Plus your insistence on being disingenuous about what Nikk and Teckos want, doesn't do you any credit. It just makes you look like you are the one trolling. Either pay them the courtesy of being truthful about their intentions, or don't mention them at all. They do not think the "only way" is to remove local. For someone that constantly looks for the grey areas, you do a poor job of seeing that in others arguments.
Read their posts. They want local removed and a new intel system put in place. They then want hunting modules put in place to hunt cloakers. Every single time someone has raised a different idea that doesn't involve local, they have produced walls and walls of text stating that whatever idea is suggested is wrong and the only way to fix it is to remove local.
Perhaps you haven't read enough of this thread. I've been here for most of it, so I've seen what they've posted. If the idea doesn't start with "remove local" they are instantly against it. They have repeatedly stated that the cause is local and thus the only fix is removing local.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3250 - 2013-11-28 17:30:15 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Uh, actually, the intel change to local would completely eliminate AFK cloaking.

Think about the requirements to AFK cloak:
1. You must be cloaked
2. You must not interact with others or the environment in a way that would betray your activity
3. Other players must be aware of your presence

Point 2 eliminates point 3 being possible, under my intel system.
Only local chat currently reveals a cloaked presence, enabling point 3. As my system removes this, it also removes AFK cloaking.

My hunting module side, in it's own thread, is a counter to ACTIVE cloaking. It is not balanced without my intel change, as it would then trivialize cloaking.

So just to clarify, since you seem to go 2 ways on this depending on time of day, under your idea, would a cloaked ship be able to be detected entering a system with the "effort based intel system" in place?

I was under this impression this was a "Yes", since without that cloakers would be stupidly overpowered.

Honestly this is all still utterly moot, since CCP won't remove local.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3251 - 2013-11-28 17:41:38 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


Honestly this is all still utterly moot, since CCP won't remove local.

I said the same thing about them not adding a dueling mechanic.

Don't be so sure of yourself.
Thufir Bezluden
Doomheim
#3252 - 2013-11-28 17:52:58 UTC
CCP experimented with a Stealth Module and Cloak Scrambler -not the exact names, but that's what they did. The Stealth Module is in for the BS hulls to reduce signature radius. Cloak Scrambler was like a 20k radius smartbomb that did only 1 thing -decloak people within the radius at gates. Would CCP be willing to experiment with a Cloak Scrambler -even if for interdictor or heavy interdictor and with 10k radius, 30s recycle and/or perhaps a charge required for it? Yes, it means Force Recon's and Covert Ops have a nasty chance of getting decloaked and destroyed, but eve is about risk/reward.

Means nothing vs AFK cloakers; just AFK cloakers
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3253 - 2013-11-28 18:34:36 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:


Honestly this is all still utterly moot, since CCP won't remove local.

I said the same thing about them not adding a dueling mechanic.

Don't be so sure of yourself.
Well I'm sure that if they did, they's lose a whole bunch of subs and have another monument shooting uprising.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3254 - 2013-11-28 18:36:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Thufir Bezluden wrote:
CCP experimented with a Stealth Module and Cloak Scrambler -not the exact names, but that's what they did. The Stealth Module is in for the BS hulls to reduce signature radius. Cloak Scrambler was like a 20k radius smartbomb that did only 1 thing -decloak people within the radius at gates. Would CCP be willing to experiment with a Cloak Scrambler -even if for interdictor or heavy interdictor and with 10k radius, 30s recycle and/or perhaps a charge required for it? Yes, it means Force Recon's and Covert Ops have a nasty chance of getting decloaked and destroyed, but eve is about risk/reward.

Means nothing vs AFK cloakers; just AFK cloakers
Honestly, knowing what CCP are like, they are most likely to make cloaker hunting part of exploration by adding probes. The only time they've ever semi-officially commented on it they stated they wanted a cat-and-mouse mechanic between hunters and cloakers.

EDIT: While I can see why that would be a bad idea by the way I now officially don;t care. The only real amount of cloaking I did was to get through gatecamps and the like, but with the new interceptor mechanics. there's simply no point going covops. 11.52 au/s, 35m rad, double stabbed. Insanity.

EDIT 2: Oh and before Teckos dives in with a "See! He hates active cloakers!", that;s not to say I don;t care as in I want active cloakers nerfed, I'd much prefer a solution that has minimal affect on anyone not AFK. But with the inability to discuss such solutions, it won't be affecting me when CCP make a change that nerfs them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#3255 - 2013-11-28 20:58:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
But it's isnt the underlying cause. It isn't at all the cause. It's the main reason they can be seen, but that does not mean it is the cause. The cause of AFK cloaking is the ability to AFK safely cloaked for ever. Without that ability, AFK cloaking can never exist, no matter what other systems are in place around it. With local removed, but an effort based intel system in place, AFK cloaking remains. Like I states, even with Nikks post, a hunting modules for cloakers has to be put in place to combat AFK cloakers. Seriously, go check. So really his idea is to nerf cloaks AND remove local. The removal of local is not even the part that stops the AFK cloaking.
You have your opinions and they differ from mine. You now imply people AFK cloak, because it's safe to do so. But fail to mention why they do so in the first place. People don't simply log in one day and say: "You know what, I'm going into sov null and I'm going to AFK cloak all day because it's safe to do so for ever." Although a very funny notion, it's far from honest.

You again read only black and white into Nikk and Teckos ideas and in the process, misrepresent them. Yes they say remove intel from local and make people work for it. And yes I do believe this would stop AFKing in regards to psychological warfare. But in keeping with their goal of balance, they propose giving people the chance to hunt cloaked ships. For they like I, believe cloaked ships would become over powerful with local changed. How you arrived at the notion it's because they still need to stop AFK cloaking, is rather baffling tbh. Considering you yourself have stated it as fact, that removing local would stop it.

I have a feeling you're not interested in an honest debate here, although I may be wrong.

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

Mag's
Azn Empire
#3256 - 2013-11-28 21:01:27 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Let's just settle this argument that afk cloakers exist because of local nonsense once and for all.
Yes let's. What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?

The point is purely in the delusional beliefs of the afk cloakers that they are having a big impact on Eve without any effort. While they are not impacting the smart players very much as ops are moved to other systems, they are in fact removing some content from the Eve Universe by denying the use of a system for certain content. So the Eve Universe is hurt, but the smart players are relatively unaffected and those few less experienced players out there soon learn how to be unaffected by simply moving systems.

SO, Mag, what is the point of the predator hiding in the null sec bush (afk cloaking) when the ostrich is in high sec because it doesn't feel like putting his head in the ground out in null sec? What is the point? Because without the use of local channel, all the prey move to where their heads are not force-buried in the ground. The loss of local does not kill afk cloaking specifically, it kills all pve hunting because the hunting grounds will be drier than Mars.

Local does not force anyone to afk cloak. Local gives no reward to the afk cloaker, except the vain delusions of his own mind imagining ghost comfort with his presence, ghost tears and ghost rage.
So what's the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of local?

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

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3257 - 2013-11-28 22:05:53 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I have a feeling you're not interested in an honest debate here, although I may be wrong.
I'm interested in hearing and discussing ALL solutions to AFK cloaking. But every time ANY solution is mentioned that doesn't start with the removal or local it gets trolled into the ground by those two pricks. I'm way beyond the point of listening to their endless drivel. We ALL get it. We ALL know what they want. They don't need to keep throwing it in every time someone suggests something different as if it's the only ******* solution.

We're 163 pages in and all they do is fill pages with walls of text about the same thing until people leave the discussion. Then when someone tries to make a new thread about it rather than get buried by their drivel, they go there, get that closed as a duplicate to force people back over here. It's digusting that they are allowed to basically bully people out of discussing an idea because it conflict with theirs. Enough is enough. **** them and **** their ******** idea. Let's just leave CCP to stick in whatever solution they want. I'm happy to bet it won't involve nuking local.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3258 - 2013-11-28 22:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Let's just settle this argument that afk cloakers exist because of local nonsense once and for all.
Yes let's. What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?

The point is purely in the delusional beliefs of the afk cloakers that they are having a big impact on Eve without any effort. While they are not impacting the smart players very much as ops are moved to other systems, they are in fact removing some content from the Eve Universe by denying the use of a system for certain content. So the Eve Universe is hurt, but the smart players are relatively unaffected and those few less experienced players out there soon learn how to be unaffected by simply moving systems.

SO, Mag, what is the point of the predator hiding in the null sec bush (afk cloaking) when the ostrich is in high sec because it doesn't feel like putting his head in the ground out in null sec? What is the point? Because without the use of local channel, all the prey move to where their heads are not force-buried in the ground. The loss of local does not kill afk cloaking specifically, it kills all pve hunting because the hunting grounds will be drier than Mars.

Local does not force anyone to afk cloak. Local gives no reward to the afk cloaker, except the vain delusions of his own mind imagining ghost comfort with his presence, ghost tears and ghost rage.
So what's the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of local?

What's the point of much of anything in cyno space without local? Even though you may say that people will cease activity B (pvp/afk cloak) without thing A (local) doesn't mean that thing A causes activity B. It could be that thing A (local) enables activity C (PVE) which attracts activity B (pvp). But your assumption fails in whs, because not only do people pvp in whs without local (and without cynos), they also afk cloak and pve. Local provides no rewards; it only acts as an early warning device against pvp, most especially against cyno blobbing, which you will not find in whs.

Yes, people afk cloak in whs ALL the time, but thanks to the cyno not being an option and the whs limiting the mass, the residents can maintain a high enough level of preparedness some of the time to counter the unknown threats. Many corps fold in wh space, though, because they are not large enough to maintain high enough levels of preparedness to handle threats and therefore players sit around in space waiting for enough others to log on. In known space, it is not possible to have enough players logged on to create a strong enough defensive preparedness against current cyno mechanics, so we really on the early warning of local for the most part. This is all really very elementary and the evidence of this behavior is quite well establish.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3259 - 2013-11-28 23:52:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Astroniomix
Andy Landen wrote:

But your assumption fails in whs, because not only do people pvp in whs without local (and without cynos), they also afk cloak and pve.

Actually people just log off in WHs.

EDIT: actually I stand corrected, WH's don't have local but they have watchlists, so people will afk cloak in systems where it is known or suspected that the residents know who is in their system.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3260 - 2013-11-29 03:46:00 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:

First, I have never had an issue lighting a cyno so that the capital has any risk of landing outside docking range or being thrown out.


Highly unlikely, especially because this is you we are talking about.

Talk about ad hominem. Ask any competent cyno pilot about how reliably a capital can be jumped onto station with a cyno with no risk to bounce or docking distance issues. Cynoing is one of the most common professions out there so surely you must know at least one decent cyno pilot. If not, then ask around until you find an elite capital group and ask them. The fact that you can't imagine a safe station cyno raises eyebrows regarding your ideas concerning capital ships.

Mag's wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Let's just settle this argument that afk cloakers exist because of local nonsense once and for all.
Yes let's. What is the point of AFK cloaking, without the use of the local chat channel?

The point is purely in the delusional beliefs of the afk cloakers that they are having a big impact on Eve without any effort. While they are not impacting the smart players very much as ops are moved to other systems, they are in fact removing some content from the Eve Universe by denying the use of a system for certain content. So the Eve Universe is hurt, but the smart players are relatively unaffected and those few less experienced players out there soon learn how to be unaffected by simply moving systems.

SO, Mag, what is the point of the predator hiding in the null sec bush (afk cloaking) when the ostrich is in high sec because it doesn't feel like putting his head in the ground out in null sec? What is the point? Because without the use of local channel, all the prey move to where their heads are not force-buried in the ground. The loss of local does not kill afk cloaking specifically, it kills all pve hunting because the hunting grounds will be drier than Mars.

Local does not force anyone to afk cloak. Local gives no reward to the afk cloaker, except the vain delusions of his own mind imagining ghost comfort with his presence, ghost tears and ghost rage.


Again, if AFK cloakers are not having any significant effect then why all the sturm and drang?

Lets just leave the current mechanic as is then.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online