Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Don't worry about it Teckos has already declared himself victorious, and thus the discussion must be over. Apparently the fact that this has been discussed for years and the general consensus has always been that replacing local would be a bad idea if CCP likes money doesn't come into it. The fact that Fozzie has mentioned it means it's a done deal.
Unfortunately his mum let him have sugar with his smug so he's still bouncing off the walls, but when he calms down he can request the thread closure for this now redundant thread.

Oh wait a second. It's not redundant... because this thread is about AFK cloaking and has absolutely nothing to do with local. Such genius.

If local chat didn't exist, then this thread about AFK cloaking wouldn't exist either.

No, I'm claiming that there is no real benefit to the change, and that most people will be negatively affected. Do you honestly think that they could put in any change that will cause more work for less and the community would just accept it? If you do, you really need to look at the community a bit more.

Wrong again buddy. The thread is about removing AFK cloakers as AFK players should not get to benefit in the ways they do without playing. YOU make it about obstacles, and you do so to downplay what other people say. I pretty much ignore most of what you say now by default as I know it's 50% tears and 50% made up nonsense.
At the end of the day though, what you want is easy cloaking ganks. Pathetic. (And you can't deny this, since if you can tell me what I "really want", then I can do the same to you.)

I'll live.

I tell you what mate, we'll just see won't we. Let's see what happens when they put in a pointless change catering to a minority that makes most peoples playtime considerably less fun and see what the reaction is.

Yes it's an opinion. It's a stupid idea for change. Anyone can see it's a stupid idea since it has absolutely no benefits for the majority of the playerbase. Just because it makes smug little **** like you happy because you can AFK mine and gank unarmed players with ease, doesn't mean it's good for the game.

Get him Andy!!!

TBH Teckos, since this is "resolved" do us all a favour and get the thread closed.
I'm going to do myself a favour and simply ignore your posts, since your inability to even accept other opinions as valid and your pure arrogance infuriate me. It's obvious you are never going to stop responding like a child and you are going to continue to swim about in your own self-obsession so there's simply no point in discussing anything with you.
When CCP make an announcement we'll see what happens.

It isn't resolved though...there is still an issue of what replaces local as an intel source. CCP Explorer made that point. And he made the point that it required ideas from the community.

Thus, I'll make no such request.

What gives you that idea? The issue of local and AFK cloaking are tied together. You yourself have stated that decoupling intel from local would solve the problem. Now CCP has indicated that local, as an intel tool, is too powerful and that they MAY change it.

Now, it is possible to address two issues with one change....yes, to local.

Now, if you want to continue with the non-local solutions, fine. But there is nothing to say I or anyone can't respond with why we think it is a bad idea.

For example, one commonly proposed solution would be to let cloaked ships be scannable. But this is not a solution to just AFK cloaking, it is a nerf to any and all use of the cloaking device. Unless it can be configured so it doesn't have any effect on non-AFK cloak uses it is a bad idea (yes, in my opinioni). Writing that is not trolling. It is pointing out a short coming with that idea.

And, it is an idea that has been proposed so many times it often just gets the response of, "Great you just broke wormholes, horrible idea is horrible. Go biomass yourself."

I find this absolutely fascinating. On one hand you admit removing local would solve the AFK cloaking probelm--i.e. AFK cloaking and local are inter-related. Then on the other you insist they are not. I find it fascinating you hold two largely inconsistent views at the same time. Can you explain this to me?



I don't think this is true. I have argued extensively against the AFK flag/timer/logoff/warp suggestion and I'm pretty sure I did not simply say, "No, it is bad because it does not address local." In fact, I've argued it is bad because it also targets people who are not AFK cloaking.

Then you claim no big deal since it is not good having AFK people in game (I disagree since alot of in game resources move around that way)...which is also curious since you yell at me and insult me for not knowing the title of this thread...which you appear to ignore or not know when you make such arguments.



YES! But I don't think you see the deeper implication here.

A simple change like scanner probes nerfs all use of cloaks. And it conveys a benefit to a subset of the player population. To use an analogy it is like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Its great for Paul, but sucks for Peter.

I prefer changes to local because it effects everyone. Nobody is singled out for a nerf or a benefit (okay cloaking ships would get a benefit, but that is why they'd also get a nerf to all cloaks, for example vulnerable to scanner probes).



I am not automatically dismissing any ideas. If there is a flaw I point it out. I don't think the way to handle AFK cloaking is to nerf non-AFK cloakers. The problem with every suggestion I've seen is that they all nerf non-AFK cloakers.

You could argue the change local solution also nerfs non-AFK cloakers...and I agree! But it applies to everyone. The guy who is cloaked in a system...he can't use local either. If the solution to the intel problem is sov based, he can't even use that if he does not belong to the sov holding alliance. And it does not impact some schmoe autopiloting between Dodixie and Jita.

And are you really suggesting that if I don't see a flaw in a proposed idea I NOT point it out? If that is the case why even have a DISCUSSION forum?