These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1561 - 2013-09-20 21:34:37 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Which Grav Site to Warp too:
I haven't gone stalking miners in null at all, for the most part. However, I think there are some missing bits here. When somebody like The Gunslinger jumps in and wants to warp to a Grav site he'll first have to open up the d-scan, scan down the list of sites that popped up and pick one to warp too. But upon jump in he wont know if he should go to a grav site or an anomaly. So he might have to hit d-scan as well. Then pick where he is going to warp too. So, coupled with the time differential for jumping in, opening d-scan, hitting d-scan, looking at the results, looking through the various sites in system, and then picking one to warp too, it seems to me that our hapless miner is not so hapless. By that time he should be at a bookmark, and aligning out to either a safe pos or even the station.
The index of the system tells you anom or grav. you generally have more time on an anom, so you can usually d-scan those out. This is how the successful PvP pilots hunting us in null do it.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Cloak = Invisible:
Cloaks do not entirely render the ship/pilot invisible, they still show up in local. That is sufficient to make surprising another pilot nearly impossible aside from error (wasn't watching local for whatever reason).
Invisible enough to never be able to be located. Even with new probes all they have to do is stay in motion, even AFK and you won;t be found.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Bookmarks:
Making bookmarks never struck me as that tough to do with an interceptor or even just a fast frigate. v0v
Making that many, placed in the right locations, 200km in each direction and every time you pop a grav, it's difficult. not to mention there's rocks and stuff, you can;t assume you'll always be able to just run in a perfect circle. You can go round the outside, but then you have to switch rocks allthe time as you go out of range.
Sure, making a couple of bookmarks like gatespots, where their relative position is meaningless, easy.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Risk v. Reward and dying like a puppy:
I would never kill a puppy...they are cute and cuddly. P Now killing a miner, well that is a different story, but I don't expect anyone in game to just let themselves be killed. I've already posted on this quite a bit and have made it perfectly clear that risk should be present for everyone playing in null.
Sure, but unless Gunslinger has a guarantee to use his scouting ship to kill me, he's not happy. The fact that a miner, designed to evade can evade seems to upset him thoroughly. It's not my fault he picks a scout ship to PvP in and thus has everyone simply ignore him. If he came in a combat ship, I happily give him his fair combat. I just don't see why I should be made to have to put in multiple alts, constant effort and still have a chance to die against a single ship, while he simply has to fly that single ship.

Not to mention, this is all beside the point, cos this is all about local intel and active cloakers, nothing to do with AFK cloaking.

And on another note, ALL cloakers make us dock. So why is the removal of AFK cloakers going to give us more chance to survive? It won't, it simply means we'd change systems less, and thus be easier to find in our home systems.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1562 - 2013-09-20 21:39:46 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The only intel it "hands out" is removing the false intel planted by players that are AFK. Why should they be able to plant that intel?
At the end of the day, if we can;t even agree on that then there's a fundamental difference in our belief in the system. I simply want to deal with the ability for AFK players to permanently add threat to a system. If we can't get beyond "local bad", we're never going to get anywhere.
So the only agreeable solution is, it stays as is, I stay safe, but continue to move when a cloaker hijacks the system. Null continues to be clustered into non camped systems leaving the rest empty. Local remains as is.

Ah, that would be a fundamental difference in our perspectives, I think.

I personally view local as a chat channel, which is being exploited as intel.
Since CCP doesn't care, and EVE is a sandbox, it kinda works for everyone on some level.

It also works against us, as you point out.

It's not "exploited" as intel. It IS intel. No matter how much a single CCP employee says "I would like local chat to only be chat", it was originally designed to show people and that it does. It's not like they programmed it then suddenly went "holy crap! where did this player list come from?!?". And I don;t even disagree that something needs to be done about it, but trashing it so cloakers can get around freely is simply a buff to cloakers. As much as you state they would lose intel too, they simply don't use it much as it, which is why none of them care if it's gone.

Again though - beside the point. I'm PURELY talking about removing AFK CLOAKERS. That is players NOT PLAYING THE GAME. It's not "free intel", since we assume ALL NEUTS to be active. If some lazy bastards wants to log on and not play the game, that shouldn't affect active players.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1563 - 2013-09-20 21:43:22 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Do try and remember I am the miner in this scenario, not the person cloaked in a hostile sov system.

If I undock in this scene, I am the guy handling the unknown threat.

And not complaining that some guy has the nerve to hang out in my area.
With the ideas you post, the threads you respond to and the actions you take, you clearly love cloakers. If you are a miner, it's because you are waiting for cloaking to be easier.
And it's NOT complaining about a guy hanging out in my area, It's complaining that AFK PEOPLE CAN PLAY THE GAME. I HATE AFK CLOAKERS. I HATE AFK MINERS. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO PLAY, DON'T ******* PLAY. Are you understanding this at all? Because all you keep doing is repeating the same bullshit over and over. You are purposely trolling this thread with your idea for your thread. Probably because noone can be bothered to comment on your crappy idea. Go back to your thread and complain there, this is an AFK CLOAKING THREAD - NOT A REMOVE LOCAL THREAD.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1564 - 2013-09-20 21:47:25 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
The only intel it "hands out" is removing the false intel planted by players that are AFK. Why should they be able to plant that intel?
At the end of the day, if we can;t even agree on that then there's a fundamental difference in our belief in the system. I simply want to deal with the ability for AFK players to permanently add threat to a system. If we can't get beyond "local bad", we're never going to get anywhere.
So the only agreeable solution is, it stays as is, I stay safe, but continue to move when a cloaker hijacks the system. Null continues to be clustered into non camped systems leaving the rest empty. Local remains as is.


Well, I think players should be able to mislead other players so long as that is not deemed an exploit/violation of the EULA/ToS. For example, a player who misleads people in a corporation/alliance but is in fact a spy....not a problem as far as I am concerned.

While the status quo might remain, and possibly for a long time, I think there are two things:

First, there are CCP devs who want to change things like local and how intel is gathered. Hopefully someday it will change and make the game better.

Two, we appear to have a fundamental difference in our views of the game. This is a game where lying is, generally speaking, not only allowed it is what makes this game so damn entertaining. All of the mega-scams over time that have made it into even the mainstream press? Only becuase of lying.

So that a player, in a sense, is lying by parking himself at a safe with a cloak, fine by me. I would rather have a different mechanic so that we don't have to do that, but simply nerfing cloaks is really a buff to local and handing out something for free. I find that antithetical to the very nature of this game.

You might say the same of AFK cloaking, but I see AFK cloaking as having a cost. It might be low, but it is there none-the-less.

"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
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1565 - 2013-09-20 21:52:57 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The only intel it "hands out" is removing the false intel planted by players that are AFK. Why should they be able to plant that intel?
At the end of the day, if we can;t even agree on that then there's a fundamental difference in our belief in the system. I simply want to deal with the ability for AFK players to permanently add threat to a system. If we can't get beyond "local bad", we're never going to get anywhere.
So the only agreeable solution is, it stays as is, I stay safe, but continue to move when a cloaker hijacks the system. Null continues to be clustered into non camped systems leaving the rest empty. Local remains as is.


Well, I think players should be able to mislead other players so long as that is not deemed an exploit/violation of the EULA/ToS. For example, a player who misleads people in a corporation/alliance but is in fact a spy....not a problem as far as I am concerned.

While the status quo might remain, and possibly for a long time, I think there are two things:

First, there are CCP devs who want to change things like local and how intel is gathered. Hopefully someday it will change and make the game better.

Two, we appear to have a fundamental difference in our views of the game. This is a game where lying is, generally speaking, not only allowed it is what makes this game so damn entertaining. All of the mega-scams over time that have made it into even the mainstream press? Only becuase of lying.

So that a player, in a sense, is lying by parking himself at a safe with a cloak, fine by me. I would rather have a different mechanic so that we don't have to do that, but simply nerfing cloaks is really a buff to local and handing out something for free. I find that antithetical to the very nature of this game.

You might say the same of AFK cloaking, but I see AFK cloaking as having a cost. It might be low, but it is there none-the-less.

To be honest, I can't be bothered to care any more. If any CCP official thing comes up about either AFK cloaking or removing local I'll speak for keeping local and removing AFK cloaked. I honestly couldn't have cared one way or the other about local, but since you guys refuse to simply drop it and talk about the subject at hand independently, you've pretty much changed my mind. I'd now rather keep it, so cloakers don't get an insane buff over regular combat ships.
But they won't say anything official for a LONG time, if ever.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1566 - 2013-09-20 22:06:04 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
The index of the system tells you anom or grav. you generally have more time on an anom, so you can usually d-scan those out. This is how the successful PvP pilots hunting us in null do it.


This still gives you plenty of time to escape, barring some sort of glitch, etc. Like I said, on first jump in I don't know if you are in an exhumer or in a marauder. So I'll have to do a d-scan, and if it picks up your ship type, I can make a more educated guess. Still that adds time, and if it takes me 1-2 seconds to intiate warp, yes 99-100% of the time you'll get safe. The current mechanic is heavily rigged in your favor. The result: AFK cloaking.

Quote:
Invisible enough to never be able to be located. Even with new probes all they have to do is stay in motion, even AFK and you won;t be found.


Several points. First, this wasn't my point. Being visible in local makes hunting a resident nearly impossible. The residents will either dock up and do nothing, or dock up and re-ship. At that point the ship with the cov-ops cloaking device is hopelessly outclassed; possible solution: open up a cyno (covert or otherwise) and bring in help to kill anyone that aggresses.

Mechanics have consequences...the use of cynos and cloaks in the scenarios discussed here are a result of how local works.

Quote:
Making that many, placed in the right locations, 200km in each direction and every time you pop a grav, it's difficult. not to mention there's rocks and stuff, you can;t assume you'll always be able to just run in a perfect circle. You can go round the outside, but then you have to switch rocks allthe time as you go out of range.
Sure, making a couple of bookmarks like gatespots, where their relative position is meaningless, easy.


You are acquiring resources. CCP has always stated they want people doing this to have to "work" for it. I don't see the problem here. You want to mine some of the rarest ores/minerals in game. So you have to spend some time to mitigate risk. Okay.

Quote:
Sure, but unless Gunslinger has a guarantee to use his scouting ship to kill me, he's not happy. The fact that a miner, designed to evade can evade seems to upset him thoroughly. It's not my fault he picks a scout ship to PvP in and thus has everyone simply ignore him. If he came in a combat ship, I happily give him his fair combat. I just don't see why I should be made to have to put in multiple alts, constant effort and still have a chance to die against a single ship, while he simply has to fly that single ship.

Not to mention, this is all beside the point, cos this is all about local intel and active cloakers, nothing to do with AFK cloaking.

And on another note, ALL cloakers make us dock. So why is the removal of AFK cloakers going to give us more chance to survive? It won't, it simply means we'd change systems less, and thus be easier to find in our home systems.


Guaranteed kill? That is not a fair representation of what The Gunslinger has written. And combat in this game is rarely if ever fair. People always look for an edge or advantage so as to wipe out their opponent.

As for your level of effort, that is because you want to minimize the risk. You don't have to take those steps. You only have to take them if you want have the lowest possible risk. And even then it isn't that much of an improvement, IMO. Putting up some bubbles would do wonders for your safety. Is it "more work", well yeah. You want more safety...so work for it.

The problem is though, is that no matter how hard a PvP pilot works, the current mechanics are rigged in your favor. You'll have time to warp to safety 99-100% of the time. Add in alts in outlying systems and if you don't get 100% then you really had some very bad luck.

And it isn't that AFK cloakers increase your chances of dying, at least not immediately. They take local and use it against you. They use the very mechanic you use to get safe, to stay safe...and not acquire any resources. And if they are patient enough, possibly getting some kills from those who decide that the person is always AFK and undocks and starts ratting, mining, etc.

"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
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1567 - 2013-09-20 22:24:56 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
This still gives you plenty of time to escape, barring some sort of glitch, etc. Like I said, on first jump in I don't know if you are in an exhumer or in a marauder. So I'll have to do a d-scan, and if it picks up your ship type, I can make a more educated guess. Still that adds time, and if it takes me 1-2 seconds to intiate warp, yes 99-100% of the time you'll get safe. The current mechanic is heavily rigged in your favor. The result: AFK cloaking.
Miners in null STILL DIE. So you can't claim it to be across the board that easy. And AFK cloaking as a result? That DOESN'T generate kills! It simply moves miners to a new system. That is the most ridiculous response their is to a miner escaping.
Most AFK cloakers to it to inflict material damage on null alliances that they can't kill. The ACTUALY solution is: Use a COMBAT SHIP. I will NEVER engage a cloakers ship. Since he will only decloak if he's sure of a kill, It's pointless me wasting my time trying to PvP with him. A combat ship on the other hand I will engage. So if the aim REALLY IS to PvP, then bringing a combat ship is the solution. If you are resorting to AFK cloaking, then your intention was never to PvP, it was to score easy kills.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Several points. First, this wasn't my point. Being visible in local makes hunting a resident nearly impossible. The residents will either dock up and do nothing, or dock up and re-ship. At that point the ship with the cov-ops cloaking device is hopelessly outclassed; possible solution: open up a cyno (covert or otherwise) and bring in help to kill anyone that aggresses.
Or, turn up in a combat ship. Cloaking ships are not designed for PvP natively. Bring a better ship. Your defending poor ship choice saying that the mechanics should be brought down so a scout ships is viable for combat.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Mechanics have consequences...the use of cynos and cloaks in the scenarios discussed here are a result of how local works.
I disagree. Cloaks and cynos are separate from local mechanics. Cloaking ships are even more used in WH space, so it's clear the use of covops is not a response to local. If anything local stops covops ships being the sole choice.

Teckos Pech wrote:
You are acquiring resources. CCP has always stated they want people doing this to have to "work" for it. I don't see the problem here. You want to mine some of the rarest ores/minerals in game. So you have to spend some time to mitigate risk. Okay.
And you want to add MORE time and MORE alts to do this. I think it should be fair. If a cloaker only has to being 1 char, so should I. And you purposely miss off that even holding the system in the first place take effort and isk. Combined effort and isk on the defenders side is already considerably higher than a cloaker.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Guaranteed kill? That is not a fair representation of what The Gunslinger has written. And combat in this game is rarely if ever fair. People always look for an edge or advantage so as to wipe out their opponent.
As for your level of effort, that is because you want to minimize the risk. You don't have to take those steps. You only have to take them if you want have the lowest possible risk. And even then it isn't that much of an improvement, IMO. Putting up some bubbles would do wonders for your safety. Is it "more work", well yeah. You want more safety...so work for it.
Sure it is. I've already covered this several times.
Yeah, cos with local gone a bubble is gonna stop a cloaker.
And I don't want more safety. I want AFK cloakers to have to PLAY THE GAME - THAT'S ALL. That does NOTHING for safety, since regardless of AFKness, I take steps to get safe.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1568 - 2013-09-20 22:25:02 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
The problem is though, is that no matter how hard a PvP pilot works, the current mechanics are rigged in your favor. You'll have time to warp to safety 99-100% of the time. Add in alts in outlying systems and if you don't get 100% then you really had some very bad luck.
That is bull though. People die EVERY DAY. You can't tell me nobody is dying from outsiders roaming null. So come back with evidence that every miner is 99% safe. I'm close to that, but I'm an old character with maxed out navigation skills and can align out considerably faster.

Teckos Pech wrote:
And it isn't that AFK cloakers increase your chances of dying, at least not immediately. They take local and use it against you. They use the very mechanic you use to get safe, to stay safe...and not acquire any resources. And if they are patient enough, possibly getting some kills from those who decide that the person is always AFK and undocks and starts ratting, mining, etc.
No, they don't. They cause us to move and they cause null to empty out, and that's all. The number of times a players goes out while a cloaker is there, assuming he's AFK is minimal. Most that go out would go out regardless.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1569 - 2013-09-20 23:13:01 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
The problem is though, is that no matter how hard a PvP pilot works, the current mechanics are rigged in your favor. You'll have time to warp to safety 99-100% of the time. Add in alts in outlying systems and if you don't get 100% then you really had some very bad luck.
That is bull though. People die EVERY DAY. You can't tell me nobody is dying from outsiders roaming null. So come back with evidence that every miner is 99% safe. I'm close to that, but I'm an old character with maxed out navigation skills and can align out considerably faster.

Teckos Pech wrote:
And it isn't that AFK cloakers increase your chances of dying, at least not immediately. They take local and use it against you. They use the very mechanic you use to get safe, to stay safe...and not acquire any resources. And if they are patient enough, possibly getting some kills from those who decide that the person is always AFK and undocks and starts ratting, mining, etc.
No, they don't. They cause us to move and they cause null to empty out, and that's all. The number of times a players goes out while a cloaker is there, assuming he's AFK is minimal. Most that go out would go out regardless.


Dying in null is not the same as dying while ratting/mining in a given system. People do move around null, and that is when they are most vulnerable. But if you stay in one system and as you claim: do it totally right, then they will get away nearly every single time.

If an AFK cloaker is not such a big deal, why are there so many threads about it?

"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
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1570 - 2013-09-20 23:18:32 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
The problem is though, is that no matter how hard a PvP pilot works, the current mechanics are rigged in your favor. You'll have time to warp to safety 99-100% of the time. Add in alts in outlying systems and if you don't get 100% then you really had some very bad luck.
That is bull though. People die EVERY DAY. You can't tell me nobody is dying from outsiders roaming null. So come back with evidence that every miner is 99% safe. I'm close to that, but I'm an old character with maxed out navigation skills and can align out considerably faster.

Teckos Pech wrote:
And it isn't that AFK cloakers increase your chances of dying, at least not immediately. They take local and use it against you. They use the very mechanic you use to get safe, to stay safe...and not acquire any resources. And if they are patient enough, possibly getting some kills from those who decide that the person is always AFK and undocks and starts ratting, mining, etc.
No, they don't. They cause us to move and they cause null to empty out, and that's all. The number of times a players goes out while a cloaker is there, assuming he's AFK is minimal. Most that go out would go out regardless.


Dying in null is not the same as dying while ratting/mining in a given system. People do move around null, and that is when they are most vulnerable. But if you stay in one system and as you claim: do it totally right, then they will get away nearly every single time.

If an AFK cloaker is not such a big deal, why are there so many threads about it?

I didn't say they weren't a big deal. I said their goal was not kill generation. It's resource denial.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Vas Eldryn
#1571 - 2013-09-21 02:47:24 UTC
I never undock a PVE ship if there is a cloaked cyno ship in system, one these ships cost too much for the risk to worth the reward. Plus it rewards a mechanic I disagree with.

Sadly there isn't much my PVP ships can do in this situation either, so I just remain docked and use high sec alts.

In my alliance, staying POS'ed / docked during a AFK cyno cloaked camp is actually mandatory, losing a ship to a cyno is deemed to be inciting these guys to stay.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1572 - 2013-09-21 03:01:12 UTC
Vas Eldryn wrote:
I never undock a PVE ship if there is a cloaked cyno ship in system, one these ships cost too much for the risk to worth the reward. Plus it rewards a mechanic I disagree with.

Sadly there isn't much my PVP ships can do in this situation either, so I just remain docked and use high sec alts.

In my alliance, staying POS'ed / docked during a AFK cyno cloaked camp is actually mandatory, losing a ship to a cyno is deemed to be inciting these guys to stay.

This is pretty common practice, mainly because it is possible to avoid hostiles by evasion as long as they are not in the system already.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
yasumitu
Electric Sheep Machinery
Caladrius Alliance
#1573 - 2013-09-21 15:54:40 UTC  |  Edited by: yasumitu
I think that it is unfair that AFK cloaky can one-sidedly do harassment.

We should prepare counter ship by 24 hour situation as long as he is and prepare it.
When it enjoys taking a bath or it sets off for work even if he is eating lunch

We do not know whether he is in front of the keyboard.

Proposal

Cloak Module doesn't do nerf.
Anti cloak combat Probe is requested.
It doesn't influence cloak ship usually used,
Wonderful specification.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1574 - 2013-09-21 19:20:23 UTC
yasumitu wrote:

Cloak Module doesn't do nerf.
Anti cloak combat Probe is requested.


These two are a nerf to cloaks. What does the PvE pilot give up? Nothing. Thus, unbalanced, so nope not supported. Now if the PvE pilot is willing to give up something in return....

"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
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1575 - 2013-09-21 19:29:07 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This still gives you plenty of time to escape, barring some sort of glitch, etc. Like I said, on first jump in I don't know if you are in an exhumer or in a marauder. So I'll have to do a d-scan, and if it picks up your ship type, I can make a more educated guess. Still that adds time, and if it takes me 1-2 seconds to intiate warp, yes 99-100% of the time you'll get safe. The current mechanic is heavily rigged in your favor. The result: AFK cloaking.
Miners in null STILL DIE. So you can't claim it to be across the board that easy. And AFK cloaking as a result? That DOESN'T generate kills! It simply moves miners to a new system. That is the most ridiculous response their is to a miner escaping.
Most AFK cloakers to it to inflict material damage on null alliances that they can't kill. The ACTUALY solution is: Use a COMBAT SHIP. I will NEVER engage a cloakers ship. Since he will only decloak if he's sure of a kill, It's pointless me wasting my time trying to PvP with him. A combat ship on the other hand I will engage. So if the aim REALLY IS to PvP, then bringing a combat ship is the solution. If you are resorting to AFK cloaking, then your intention was never to PvP, it was to score easy kills.


Sure. Even if every miner in null has a 99%-100% chance to escape, depending on skills and each situation, then given enough miners and enough people trying to kill them you'll still see mining ships in null turning up on killboards.

And AFK cloaking may generate kills on occasion. Yes moving over a system or two is always an option and not a bad one, but not everyone will try that and some people get complancent...you know those dead mining ships we see on the KBs you noted above.

And combat ships have as much chance of catching a guy in a grav site or anom as a cloaking ship which is part of the problem since the chance is so low. So people often resort to AFK cloaking. Desensitize the residents to your presence, then when you aren't AFK and somebody undocks something and goes to do something, then you have them. With a few buddies.

And what is it with the easy kill thing? Why is people throw it around like a slur? Its really silly when you think about it. A 10 man gang that kills people they happen to catch in anoms, grav sites or jumping through gates are getting easy kills too. An exhumer stands no chance. But for some reason that doesn't get the "easy kill" slur.

"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
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#1576 - 2013-09-21 20:13:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Which Grav Site to Warp too:
I haven't gone stalking miners in null at all, for the most part. However, I think there are some missing bits here. When somebody like The Gunslinger jumps in and wants to warp to a Grav site he'll first have to open up the d-scan, scan down the list of sites that popped up and pick one to warp too. But upon jump in he wont know if he should go to a grav site or an anomaly. So he might have to hit d-scan as well. Then pick where he is going to warp too. So, coupled with the time differential for jumping in, opening d-scan, hitting d-scan, looking at the results, looking through the various sites in system, and then picking one to warp too, it seems to me that our hapless miner is not so hapless. By that time he should be at a bookmark, and aligning out to either a safe pos or even the station.
The index of the system tells you anom or grav. you generally have more time on an anom, so you can usually d-scan those out. This is how the successful PvP pilots hunting us in null do it.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Cloak = Invisible:
Cloaks do not entirely render the ship/pilot invisible, they still show up in local. That is sufficient to make surprising another pilot nearly impossible aside from error (wasn't watching local for whatever reason).
Invisible enough to never be able to be located. Even with new probes all they have to do is stay in motion, even AFK and you won;t be found.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Bookmarks:
Making bookmarks never struck me as that tough to do with an interceptor or even just a fast frigate. v0v
Making that many, placed in the right locations, 200km in each direction and every time you pop a grav, it's difficult. not to mention there's rocks and stuff, you can;t assume you'll always be able to just run in a perfect circle. You can go round the outside, but then you have to switch rocks allthe time as you go out of range.
Sure, making a couple of bookmarks like gatespots, where their relative position is meaningless, easy.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Risk v. Reward and dying like a puppy:
I would never kill a puppy...they are cute and cuddly. P Now killing a miner, well that is a different story, but I don't expect anyone in game to just let themselves be killed. I've already posted on this quite a bit and have made it perfectly clear that risk should be present for everyone playing in null.
Sure, but unless Gunslinger has a guarantee to use his scouting ship to kill me, he's not happy. The fact that a miner, designed to evade can evade seems to upset him thoroughly. It's not my fault he picks a scout ship to PvP in and thus has everyone simply ignore him. If he came in a combat ship, I happily give him his fair combat. I just don't see why I should be made to have to put in multiple alts, constant effort and still have a chance to die against a single ship, while he simply has to fly that single ship.

Not to mention, this is all beside the point, cos this is all about local intel and active cloakers, nothing to do with AFK cloaking.

And on another note, ALL cloakers make us dock. So why is the removal of AFK cloakers going to give us more chance to survive? It won't, it simply means we'd change systems less, and thus be easier to find in our home systems.


It is so sad to see you resorting to deliberate misrepresentations of my position again. Have your arguments been so thoroughly refuted that you must instead make arguments against things I've never said? Let me try this... no lucas, the sky is not yellow! Just look at it! It's blue!

I am not asking for a guarantee of anything, I'm asking for a chance, and for balance, for the ability to influence the intel others have about me by my actions, rather than them be automatically be provided every last iota of intel about me or what level of threat I am for no effort and with no possible way for me to influence what they know about me
Alternate Jita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1577 - 2013-09-21 22:53:28 UTC
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED



My turn, so i thought about this and here is what i came up with:

tldr

  1. Cloaking has a max timer of 1 hour
  2. Cloaking will have a reactivation delay
  3. Ending cloak will generate a flag so you cannot log off safely
  4. Flag and reactivation time is based on how long you had been cloaked
  5. 1 minute will NOT have the same flag time ratio as 1 hour
  6. Covert Ops ships can reactivate cloak during the flag for one 5 minute cycle


GRAPH

So AFK cloaking is annoying people are too vulnerable but any mechanic change will hurt real combat.

How about this then? Give cloaking a 1 hour max timer. Before anyone says anything, if you are cloaked and active for 1 hour, your not really playing the game, go do something else. After being cloaked for 1 minute you would have a 5 second timer. After being cloaked for 1 hour, you have a 15 minute timer before you can recloak or safely log out.

But if your a bomber cloaked on a gate, thats not fun is it? Waiting around half an hour for that one guy to jump thru. Well, bombers and other cov ops get a 5 minute cycle for cloaking. This means that they can decloak, bomb, warp off, and recloak for 5 minutes and during that 5 minutes the cloaking flag is paused.

So whats the formula? I dont know, I chose to do 5 seconds at 1 minute and increase at a rate of 8.75%. This would make 1 hour equal to 15 minutes, see this google doc.

But then people will use bots! Then report them for botting and then laugh as CCP Bans them.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1578 - 2013-09-21 22:58:27 UTC
Alternate Jita wrote:
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED



My turn, so i thought about this and here is what i came up with:

tldr

  1. Cloaking has a max timer of 1 hour
  2. Cloaking will have a reactivation delay
  3. Ending cloak will generate a flag so you cannot log off safely
  4. Flag and reactivation time is based on how long you had been cloaked
  5. 1 minute will NOT have the same flag time ratio as 1 hour
  6. Covert Ops ships can reactivate cloak during the flag for one 5 minute cycle


GRAPH

So AFK cloaking is annoying people are too vulnerable but any mechanic change will hurt real combat.

How about this then? Give cloaking a 1 hour max timer. Before anyone says anything, if you are cloaked and active for 1 hour, your not really playing the game, go do something else. After being cloaked for 1 minute you would have a 5 second timer. After being cloaked for 1 hour, you have a 15 minute timer before you can recloak or safely log out.

But if your a bomber cloaked on a gate, thats not fun is it? Waiting around half an hour for that one guy to jump thru. Well, bombers and other cov ops get a 5 minute cycle for cloaking. This means that they can decloak, bomb, warp off, and recloak for 5 minutes and during that 5 minutes the cloaking flag is paused.

So whats the formula? I dont know, I chose to do 5 seconds at 1 minute and increase at a rate of 8.75%. This would make 1 hour equal to 15 minutes, see this google doc.

But then people will use bots! Then report them for botting and then laugh as CCP Bans them.


What is the PvE pilot(s) going to be giving up?

"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
Alternate Jita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1579 - 2013-09-21 22:59:53 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Alternate Jita wrote:
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
.......

.


What is the PvE pilot(s) going to be giving up?


An hour of their time for when people camp the system they are in.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1580 - 2013-09-21 23:01:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Alternate Jita wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Alternate Jita wrote:
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
GRAPHS INCLUDED
.......

.


What is the PvE pilot(s) going to be giving up?


An hour of their time for when people camp the system they are in.


So, they get increased certainty for a hour of lost ratting/mining/etc.

So, in other words, not much.

Sorry, not a very equitable trade. And it leaves in place a dubious mechanic: local as a source of intel.

Also, this adversely impacts active cloakers. So, nope. Bad idea.

"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