These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Sonar Probes (Finding Cloaked ships)

Author
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#21 - 2013-06-10 13:41:08 UTC
Jint Hikaru wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

Please explain why "cloaky campers" are an issue.

"They shut down my pve activities" is not a valid response just fyi, because they mechanically can't, but even if they could then it'd be up to you to deal with it. I don't complain that gatecamps shut down my autopiloting through lowsec tours :)


because they are in local so they pose a threat that cant be ignored in 0.0 space and that is all fine if the person is flying/ active but not wile he is AFK watching a movie or be at work or even sleeping.


They are doing EXACTLY the same as people AFK in a station / outpost / POS.... but I never see posts asking for a way to eject those people from their places of safety.


if someone is afk in station you can easy check that he is there a cloaky not so much

personaly i couldnt care less as i live in WH space now so i dont have local at all. but lot of people live in 0.0 and well it needs fixing.

BTW its funny how you all completly ignoring me seeing the problem from the cloaky side (lack of targets because local intel is too strong) fact it the mechanics are broken and need a fix that is good for both parties. let me make it EXTRA clear i do NOT want to make it safer for people doing PVE in 0.0

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#22 - 2013-06-10 14:09:35 UTC
Cloaking mechanics are not broken. Intel mechanics are broken. Let's be correct here.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#23 - 2013-06-10 14:11:22 UTC
Then do something about PvE pilots being able to use local's intel properties for the express purpose of getting safe before any threat can reach them.

Make it so local is not the perfect means by which to get safe whenever a hostile gets in your space.

Only by forcing an effort on the defender's part, can you create the potential to fail at this defense. When the game does it for them to this degree, it destroys our ability to compete.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#24 - 2013-06-10 14:13:13 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Cloaking mechanics are not broken. Intel mechanics are broken. Let's be correct here.


it all depends on the situation at this point cloaking and intel are broken. if they fix it properly cloaking might be able to stay untouched but i dont see an easy solution so cloaking may need some tweaks.

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#25 - 2013-06-10 14:17:35 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Cloaking mechanics are not broken. Intel mechanics are broken. Let's be correct here.


it all depends on the situation at this point cloaking and intel are broken. if they fix it properly cloaking might be able to stay untouched but i dont see an easy solution so cloaking may need some tweaks.

I would suggest this change to intel:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2369739#post2369739

And this change to cloaking, following or simultaneously:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2668453#post2668453

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#26 - 2013-06-10 14:23:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellendras Silver
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Then do something about PvE pilots being able to use local's intel properties for the express purpose of getting safe before any threat can reach them.

Make it so local is not the perfect means by which to get safe whenever a hostile gets in your space.

Only by forcing an effort on the defender's part, can you create the potential to fail at this defense. When the game does it for them to this degree, it destroys our ability to compete.


that i like... like a delay on local lets say like this

high sec
+1.0 = no delay
+0.9 = local delay 1 min
+0.8 = local delay 2 min
+0.7 = local delay 3 min
+0.6 = local delay 4 min
+0.5 = local delay 5 min
low sec
+0.4 = local delay 7.5 min
+0.3 = local delay 10 min
+0.2 = local delay 12.5 min
+0.1 = local delay 15 min
null sec
-0.1 = local delay 20 min
-0.2 = local delay 25 min
-0.3 = local delay 30 min
-0.4 = local delay 35 min
-0.5 = local delay 40 min
-0.6 = local delay 45 min
-0.7 = local delay 50 min
-0.8 = local delay 55 min
-0.9 = local delay 60 min
-1.0 = no local at all

this will give great options to kill people and cloaking can remain how it is now but if you stay claoked AFK you come in local so you cant AFK cloak for hours and hours but you do have time to sneak arround unseen. and the lower the security the higher the local delay and true sec no local like in WHs (unless you type text ofc) so most profitable space is also more dangerous Big smile

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#27 - 2013-06-10 16:19:40 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

Please explain why "cloaky campers" are an issue.

"They shut down my pve activities" is not a valid response just fyi, because they mechanically can't, but even if they could then it'd be up to you to deal with it. I don't complain that gatecamps shut down my autopiloting through lowsec tours :)


because they are in local so they pose a threat that cant be ignored in 0.0 space and that is all fine if the person is flying/ active but not wile he is AFK watching a movie or be at work or even sleeping.


What difference does it make if they're out walking the dog or sitting at their EVE client chatting in audio/chat channels?

They're a potential threat. Man up and deal with it.

Asking CCP to give you a means to know with absolute certainty when a threat exists or not in nullsec is stupid.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#28 - 2013-06-10 16:25:13 UTC
If they're AFK or not actively piloting their cloaked ship, how are they a threat? I feel like I've said that before..
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#29 - 2013-06-10 17:15:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellendras Silver
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

Please explain why "cloaky campers" are an issue.

"They shut down my pve activities" is not a valid response just fyi, because they mechanically can't, but even if they could then it'd be up to you to deal with it. I don't complain that gatecamps shut down my autopiloting through lowsec tours :)


because they are in local so they pose a threat that cant be ignored in 0.0 space and that is all fine if the person is flying/ active but not wile he is AFK watching a movie or be at work or even sleeping.


What difference does it make if they're out walking the dog or sitting at their EVE client chatting in audio/chat channels?

They're a potential threat. Man up and deal with it.

Asking CCP to give you a means to know with absolute certainty when a threat exists or not in nullsec is stupid.


your eyes not working? my god i said multiple times that i dont want it safer i want it DIFFRENT because the way people have to get targets is pathetic. i see the problem from both sides and i think my delay in local would be perfect solution. but apperently your eyes not working What?

beside that i live in WH so no local anyway here

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#30 - 2013-06-10 17:31:51 UTC
Lyell Wolf wrote:

Basically it's scanner probes that have the ability to scan down cloaked targets. Here's the thoughts behind it...

...

This will allow us to rid of AFK cloakers, while allowing those who wish to grief systems while still actively online the ability to do so.


This idea is a culmination of ideas from people I've spoken too so I do not take full credit for all expressed ideas and opinions.



Sonar probes to detect afk people. Genial, finally some new idea! And how many brains had you to coordinate to achive this bright result? I can figure the study and effort. You did all alone or also consulted tis forum?

S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#31 - 2013-06-10 19:07:24 UTC
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
The whole point of a cloak is that it bends things: light, sound, rf, ect. around it.... evidently not local chat though.


There's no sound in space.

Hence the tagline for "Alien": "In space, no one can hear you scream".


Ether (the stuff that suposedly kills your maximum velocity) ought to carry sound waves to some degree based on known properties.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#32 - 2013-06-10 20:14:02 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

Please explain why "cloaky campers" are an issue.

"They shut down my pve activities" is not a valid response just fyi, because they mechanically can't, but even if they could then it'd be up to you to deal with it. I don't complain that gatecamps shut down my autopiloting through lowsec tours :)


because they are in local so they pose a threat that cant be ignored in 0.0 space and that is all fine if the person is flying/ active but not wile he is AFK watching a movie or be at work or even sleeping.


What difference does it make if they're out walking the dog or sitting at their EVE client chatting in audio/chat channels?

They're a potential threat. Man up and deal with it.

Asking CCP to give you a means to know with absolute certainty when a threat exists or not in nullsec is stupid.


your eyes not working? my god i said multiple times that i dont want it safer i want it DIFFRENT because the way people have to get targets is pathetic. i see the problem from both sides and i think my delay in local would be perfect solution. but apperently your eyes not working What?

beside that i live in WH so no local anyway here


How come your idea of "different" equates to making nullsec much safer via removing the only tiny little bit of uncertainty left
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#33 - 2013-06-10 20:33:12 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Then do something about PvE pilots being able to use local's intel properties for the express purpose of getting safe before any threat can reach them.

Make it so local is not the perfect means by which to get safe whenever a hostile gets in your space.

Only by forcing an effort on the defender's part, can you create the potential to fail at this defense. When the game does it for them to this degree, it destroys our ability to compete.


that i like... like a delay on local lets say like this

high sec
+1.0 = no delay
+0.9 = local delay 1 min
+0.8 = local delay 2 min
+0.7 = local delay 3 min
+0.6 = local delay 4 min
+0.5 = local delay 5 min
low sec
+0.4 = local delay 7.5 min
+0.3 = local delay 10 min
+0.2 = local delay 12.5 min
+0.1 = local delay 15 min
null sec
-0.1 = local delay 20 min
-0.2 = local delay 25 min
-0.3 = local delay 30 min
-0.4 = local delay 35 min
-0.5 = local delay 40 min
-0.6 = local delay 45 min
-0.7 = local delay 50 min
-0.8 = local delay 55 min
-0.9 = local delay 60 min
-1.0 = no local at all

this will give great options to kill people and cloaking can remain how it is now but if you stay claoked AFK you come in local so you cant AFK cloak for hours and hours but you do have time to sneak arround unseen. and the lower the security the higher the local delay and true sec no local like in WHs (unless you type text ofc) so most profitable space is also more dangerous Big smile

Fine, but make the trade off that they can only be hunted so long as they are under the delay timer.

The moment that delay expires, they appear in local, and cease to be vulnerable to hunting any more than the current system.

Limits must exist in both directions to have balance.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#34 - 2013-06-10 20:46:26 UTC
Just give people the ability to leave local. They can be in it if they want or they can leave it if they want, just like everyone leaves Constellation chat.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#35 - 2013-06-10 21:17:54 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Fine, but make the trade off that they can only be hunted so long as they are under the delay timer.

The moment that delay expires, they appear in local, and cease to be vulnerable to hunting any more than the current system.

Limits must exist in both directions to have balance.



well the way i think it should work is as followed:

as long as you under the delay timer you will not appear in local, so you can travel and each gate the delay resets so as long as you keep moving you wont appear in local (cloak or no cloak) ofc if uncloaked you can be spotted and gateflashes can be spotted too.

but you cant just sit for hours in one system... wel you can but you will turn up in local i realy think this would be awesome because the more secure the space the less delay and so the best ratting systems have long delays that give awesome PVP options

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#36 - 2013-06-10 21:19:32 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

How come your idea of "different" equates to making nullsec much safer via removing the only tiny little bit of uncertainty left


FFS read!!!!

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#37 - 2013-06-10 21:20:55 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Just give people the ability to leave local. They can be in it if they want or they can leave it if they want, just like everyone leaves Constellation chat.


no that is an terrible idea

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Mag's
Azn Empire
#38 - 2013-06-10 21:21:38 UTC
Wow a new and original thread. Full of new and original ideas. Cool beans.

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
#39 - 2013-06-10 21:41:36 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
but you cant just sit for hours in one system... wel you can but you will turn up in local i realy think this would be awesome because the more secure the space the less delay and so the best ratting systems have long delays that give awesome PVP options

I would rather not show up in local at all.

Mining is tedious enough without advertising my presence for free to any scalawag who happens to peep into the system long enough to see the chat roster there.

And when I get grinding on my ice and ore, I do sit for hours.
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2013-06-10 21:42:46 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:


because it is broken mechanics people keep bringing up ideas to fix it, that you dont have the wits to see the broken mechanics is obvious and i feel sympathy for you.


It only appears broken because of the broken mechanic that is local.

2 broken mechanics that balance themselves poorly... but at least it is somewhat balanced.

...