These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] AFK game play - the cloaked vessel

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#361 - 2014-05-01 20:55:53 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Baaldor wrote:
I am standing on the current mechanics, i have the position of not wanting it messed with. Period. If you do not like what I say then HTFU.

I am not required to come up with a solution to something that is not broken.

Also, you need to get off the grandstanding wounded knee crap, you are coming off like a 12 year old with a complex.

More ad hominem. At least you are consistent.

You are not adding anything significant or meaningful.

If you would like to contribute, then suggesting ideas, or pointing out possibly unforeseen consequences, are useful.

If you do not like an idea, fine. Name calling and pouting are not necessary, nor do they generate sympathy for your views.

If you cannot back up your opinion with actual reasons to avoid change, then your ability to contribute becomes questionable.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.


I am standing on the current mechanics as is. I back this up by stating it is working as intended. Over used phrase, but in this case, it truly applies.

You have to convince me, that this is something needed. I have not seen anything so far that makes any sense short of" the Cloaky guy makes me feel uncomfortable".

And everything so far has been from a self serving agenda, no consideration of the others that also enjoy this current mechanic as is...but as you have said, "they do not belong".

Telling me I do not belong and I am the problem is not a great way to start out a conversation in trying to work out another form of game play.


Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#362 - 2014-05-01 21:16:37 UTC
Baaldor wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
If you cannot back up your opinion with actual reasons to avoid change, then your ability to contribute becomes questionable.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.


I am standing on the current mechanics as is. I back this up by stating it is working as intended. Over used phrase, but in this case, it truly applies.

You have to convince me, that this is something needed. I have not seen anything so far that makes any sense short of" the Cloaky guy makes me feel uncomfortable".

And everything so far has been from a self serving agenda, no consideration of the others that also enjoy this current mechanic as is...but as you have said, "they do not belong".

Telling me I do not belong and I am the problem is not a great way to start out a conversation in trying to work out another form of game play.

You are repeating yourself.
Working as intended applied to aspects of every part of history. The steam engine? It worked as intended too.
And I am certain many in it's age resented changes that caused it to vanish from use.

Working as intended, is no justification against improvement and other forms of progress.

The status quo already exists, and may be best defended by those shooting down ideas by pointing out legitimate issues with them. These ideas are only bad if they make the objective game less desirable, not because change itself should be avoided.

Even you must admit, that if you cannot find flaw with an idea, then it may be worthy of consideration.
You may not want change, but that does not mean it will not come.

Ask instead, If not us, who?
If not now, when?

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#363 - 2014-05-01 22:11:55 UTC
Nofearion wrote:


Normally I'd agree with you but Eve is a game that runs 24/7. Even when you aren't playing, you're playing. If we limit the effect people have in game who are not actually at the computer, we could argue that players should only communicate via the eve game client. Same sort of reasoning. We have all heard the phrase "Mittani doesn't even log on to play anymore." Should we require of him the same standards you wish for cov ops pilots?


This is a delicate matter, as you stated there are many aspects of the game that allows for interaction while not at the computer. on this I totally agree with you. I think the problem lies in defining what is active game play. Communication and notifications out of game is a standard set by CCP, (eve gate for example) however how much should a person not in game be allowed to affect someone who is in game.

For instance I get a notification that someone is hitting one of my towers. Im at work I cant leave but I can text a corp mate and have them go defend the pos, while this communication allows me to defend my pos, it does take time and eventually requires someone In game to react to the threat. This is different than if I was in game when the pos was first attacked.

Using the above example, both the out of game and ingame players have a means to interact with each other. However if I am away from the game, logged in, afk, cloaked and just sitting while I go to the store or in your case a three day trip, I may not be able to attack anyone but I am still affecting the gameplay of active players as they have no way to tell if I am there or not.
In that respect I believe the active players should have a way to interact with me. Current mechanics do not allow that.
This is different than be getting into a system, cloaking up then logging off for a few days and coming back logging in and then active camping. That sort of thing I expect and I am ok with.
[/quote]


You don't have a way to interact with that individual in the way you want. By all means you could go find their tower and hit theirs for example as they AFK cloak you. There's no way for one to change the dynamics to the point where you can scan/scout out a cloaked ship and not nerf the capabilities of smaller groups to skirmish with bigger ones.
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
#364 - 2014-05-01 22:12:47 UTC
Saffear Stormrage wrote:
Cordo Draken wrote:
Ok, so I read through your Post, but not all the comments, as most just want to sidestep what you’re asking for to throw at you, what you “should” be doing. Ignoring all that banter, I’ve thought on this through the years… I like Cloaks too and have no desire to Nerf them… but I do believe there’s a sensible and logical solution to help deal with the AFK Cloakers, while not affecting the Active Recon Pilot.
You’ve already partial mentioned my solution, to which Obviously someone touched on before with using Probes. It would have to be a specialized Probe, which also goes along with a new technology idea. It’s not anything Crazy… Basically Sonar or as I’d like to call it USDAS (Unidentified Spatial Displacement Anomaly Sensor).
The USDAS Probes would scan at perhaps limited ranges (32 AU Max), identify what it knows (i.e. planets, star gates, asteroids, ships, etc.) and weed them out. This Scan process would take longer than typical probes. What would be left are the USDAs. Scan Deviation would be horrendous… And by the time you reach a say .5 AU Scan, the Best you’ll get to “Landing on your Target” would be within 100km. Perhaps a new skill could be implemented to reduce this a tad.
To be clear, The Probes Will Not Identify ANYTHING… Just show the USDA. Perhaps a new deployable could be developed that would be released as a decoy that would mimic a USDA with a limited lifespan.
So now what you say? Well in comes the next part of my idea… the UDAS Module. A High slot Mod that emits a sonar or Wave pulse. It’s non-invasive meaning that it doesn’t incur aggression. It doesn’t de-cloak anything. It merely resonates back a “Ghost” image of what’s in space. This sonar wave would have an optimal and fall-off… to the visual feedback. The optimal may be 20km… the fall off 10km. The visual ghost would only be visible from the pilot with the mod. Within the Optimal Range, the visual would be pretty clear… and as it goes out… less prominent. This could be used on gates, next to stations… anywhere. Obviously, if you see a cloaky ship from the resonation… you’d want to head towards it… and get close enough to de-cloak it. That’s it! The resonation would last, maybe 10 - 20 seconds and you’d need to visually look for it.
To be clear this Mod WILL NOT: 1) De cloak anything 2) show the ship on Overview 3) let you lock him 4) show his ghost image to anyone else.
Point is, this doesn’t Nerf anything, truly… anyone not open to any middle ground discussion just clearly Wants to AFK Cloak. I don't care if this would be implemented or not, but I think having work arounds for something that seems entirely immune is a good thing. I honestly don’t care about AFK cloaks… it doesn’t affect me… but this issue just needs a resolution… Much like Interceptors now.


This Idea intrigues me, the only flaw I can see so far is that sound waves do not travel in space, they must have a medium to travel through so Sonar will would not be appropriate, however some other projected wave like tachyon or looking for isogen emissions from the drive somthing like that.


True... And I don't care about the sonar... Whatever Technology they'd want to call it, I just wanted to portray the idea. You could call it Predator mode/vision, but having a more Active space of players is better than AFK ones. Heck, I wish AFKers in station would get automatically logged off after an hour of no mouse or keyboard activity, but we all know that would never happen.

Whomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my Autocannons 
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#365 - 2014-05-01 23:20:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Baaldor
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Baaldor wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
If you cannot back up your opinion with actual reasons to avoid change, then your ability to contribute becomes questionable.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.


I am standing on the current mechanics as is. I back this up by stating it is working as intended. Over used phrase, but in this case, it truly applies.

You have to convince me, that this is something needed. I have not seen anything so far that makes any sense short of" the Cloaky guy makes me feel uncomfortable".

And everything so far has been from a self serving agenda, no consideration of the others that also enjoy this current mechanic as is...but as you have said, "they do not belong".

Telling me I do not belong and I am the problem is not a great way to start out a conversation in trying to work out another form of game play.

You are repeating yourself.
Working as intended applied to aspects of every part of history. The steam engine? It worked as intended too.
And I am certain many in it's age resented changes that caused it to vanish from use.

Working as intended, is no justification against improvement and other forms of progress.

The status quo already exists, and may be best defended by those shooting down ideas by pointing out legitimate issues with them. These ideas are only bad if they make the objective game less desirable, not because change itself should be avoided.

Even you must admit, that if you cannot find flaw with an idea, then it may be worthy of consideration.
You may not want change, but that does not mean it will not come.

Ask instead, If not us, who?
If not now, when?



Working as intended is justified. I and many others have understood, adapted and worked with the current mechanics and find nothing wrong with it. As mentioned it is working as intended.

And, finally, every idea has been completely self serving and risk averse. Nothing, absolutely nothing has any shred of anything, that is even remotely acceptable.

it is you and the others that have to understand that others play the game also, and to change the mechanics, you have to give the folks something to work with that satisfies the need to push your **** in from time to time.

If ain't broke....don't fix it.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#366 - 2014-05-02 13:35:39 UTC
Baaldor wrote:
Working as intended is justified. I and many others have understood, adapted and worked with the current mechanics and find nothing wrong with it. As mentioned it is working as intended.

And, finally, every idea has been completely self serving and risk averse. Nothing, absolutely nothing has any shred of anything, that is even remotely acceptable.

it is you and the others that have to understand that others play the game also, and to change the mechanics, you have to give the folks something to work with that satisfies the need to push your **** in from time to time.

If ain't broke....don't fix it.

Blanket statements and assaults on character, implying we are self serving and risk averse.

Do go on, this is a clear winning streak for the concept of ranting sans substance.

Why are you so upset about ideas here?
Do you believe they have merit, and are potentials to be adopted?
If not, why are you posting so dramatically against them?
What is your real motive, here?

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#367 - 2014-05-02 14:51:56 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Baaldor wrote:
Working as intended is justified. I and many others have understood, adapted and worked with the current mechanics and find nothing wrong with it. As mentioned it is working as intended.

And, finally, every idea has been completely self serving and risk averse. Nothing, absolutely nothing has any shred of anything, that is even remotely acceptable.

it is you and the others that have to understand that others play the game also, and to change the mechanics, you have to give the folks something to work with that satisfies the need to push your **** in from time to time.

If ain't broke....don't fix it.

Blanket statements and assaults on character, implying we are self serving and risk averse.

Do go on, this is a clear winning streak for the concept of ranting sans substance.

Why are you so upset about ideas here?
Do you believe they have merit, and are potentials to be adopted?
If not, why are you posting so dramatically against them?
What is your real motive, here?


I am not upset, you are proving ,y point as to your own psychosis creating scenarios and monsters that are not there. Thus when you log in, you have the feeling everyone is out to get you and that life is not fair. You want the rules changed to satisfy your inability to cope.

Maybe this is not a game for you, there is nothing wrong with that, some folks can't deal with Monopoly either due to the social economic rules that people are forced to adhere to. So they choose not to play it.

It vexes me that we have people with the lack of understand on how to make a change in a simple game. All that has been presented here is based on feelings, fears, sense of injustice or entitlement. And very little in solid well thought ideas. Everything is emotionally and socially biased.

Now, I know several folks has directed a question from the crowd that does not want it changed, has never been truly answered.

"How can an AFK Cloaked vessel hurt you or cause you not to play?"
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#368 - 2014-05-02 15:07:18 UTC
Baaldor wrote:
"How can an AFK Cloaked vessel hurt you or cause you not to play?"

ROFL!!!

It can't, you silly person!
Did you really think this was going on about THAT aspect? No wonder your responses seemed so odd.

We don't recommend changes to the game for our own selfish interests, if we seriously expect other players to support them.

Oh, goodness, this has been a surprise... hearing one of my own arguments echoed like this.

Ok, back to the topic.

Emergent gameplay.
Regardless of how we view the game, we must respect how others play it, if we expect to be playing with them in it.

While I have no issue with AFK Cloaking in the perspective you mentioned, I do find it both tedious and dull to find the same pattern repeating itself ad nauseam.
Too many players are stuck in a rut. Regardless of how we think they should do things differently, clearly they are either unwilling or unable to change.

Now, cast yourself as either a miner, or one of the fellows clever enough to hop into a covert ship and slip past the protective gate camps.
You probably know how this plays out already, the mining ships get safe, while the cloaked player either leaves, logs off, or goes AFK hoping to lull someone into sneaking out.

This IS balanced. Balanced means fair and just, which this is indeed.

It is also boring as watching paint dry, and anything this dull can hardly be called inspiring game play.

I want to play as both a miner, and at other times the fellow in the cloaked ship.
To make this interesting, I would like to see mechanics adjusted to bring player driven resolutions to the experience, not a stalemate or one side always winning.

Does that make it more sensible?

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#369 - 2014-05-02 15:37:32 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Baaldor wrote:
"How can an AFK Cloaked vessel hurt you or cause you not to play?"

ROFL!!!

It can't, you silly person!
Did you really think this was going on about THAT aspect? No wonder your responses seemed so odd.

We don't recommend changes to the game for our own selfish interests, if we seriously expect other players to support them.

Oh, goodness, this has been a surprise... hearing one of my own arguments echoed like this.

Ok, back to the topic.

Emergent gameplay.
Regardless of how we view the game, we must respect how others play it, if we expect to be playing with them in it.

While I have no issue with AFK Cloaking in the perspective you mentioned, I do find it both tedious and dull to find the same pattern repeating itself ad nauseam.
Too many players are stuck in a rut. Regardless of how we think they should do things differently, clearly they are either unwilling or unable to change.

Now, cast yourself as either a miner, or one of the fellows clever enough to hop into a covert ship and slip past the protective gate camps.
You probably know how this plays out already, the mining ships get safe, while the cloaked player either leaves, logs off, or goes AFK hoping to lull someone into sneaking out.

This IS balanced. Balanced means fair and just, which this is indeed.

It is also boring as watching paint dry, and anything this dull can hardly be called inspiring game play.

I want to play as both a miner, and at other times the fellow in the cloaked ship.
To make this interesting, I would like to see mechanics adjusted to bring player driven resolutions to the experience, not a stalemate or one side always winning.

Does that make it more sensible?


Huh....Yeah next time I should probably check if there is water before jumping head first.

Regrouping, apparently i just whelped.
Nofearion
Destructive Brothers
Fraternity.
#370 - 2014-05-04 13:25:40 UTC
ok so I am not quoting anyone because it would fill a whole page of what everyone hopefully just read .. well ok most of it.

To be Clear - Do not want to nerf Cloak as it is
Unless you consider having the ability to interact with said cloak.
And that Success of this interaction increasing if said cloak is AFK

Yes as to working as intended - but is that good enough?
I believe in continual improvement, while I also adhere to "if it ain't broke don't fix it"
Everything and everyone has room for improvment.
While cloaky mechanics are not broke, they are in need of some improvement.
I honestly do not know how much being a paid cloaky camper pays, but I would rather be paid to blow stuff up, not just threaten about it.
There are a lot of pilots who play the game who feel the same way.
The goal here is not "oh my god how can I get rid of cloaky campers."
It is "How can we have more fun with cloaky things and pve things"
Increased interaction, increased motivation to be at your keyboard means increased fun.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#371 - 2014-05-04 15:25:51 UTC
Nofearion wrote:
ok so I am not quoting anyone because it would fill a whole page of what everyone hopefully just read .. well ok most of it.

To be Clear - Do not want to nerf Cloak as it is
Unless you consider having the ability to interact with said cloak.
And that Success of this interaction increasing if said cloak is AFK

Yes as to working as intended - but is that good enough?
I believe in continual improvement, while I also adhere to "if it ain't broke don't fix it"
Everything and everyone has room for improvment.
While cloaky mechanics are not broke, they are in need of some improvement.
I honestly do not know how much being a paid cloaky camper pays, but I would rather be paid to blow stuff up, not just threaten about it.
There are a lot of pilots who play the game who feel the same way.
The goal here is not "oh my god how can I get rid of cloaky campers."
It is "How can we have more fun with cloaky things and pve things"
Increased interaction, increased motivation to be at your keyboard means increased fun.

As I state often enough, I want to play both sides of this, so I am against any change that would push game play to be more in favor of either side.

I just want to see player driven resolution to happen, rather than avoiding resolution be the most practical option to either side.

I freely admit, we are not going to see cloaked play more willing to face frontline combat ships. The whole point of cloaking is to avoid that, so they can scout or attack targets behind enemy lines.

The logic behind cloaking, by extending the reasoning above, means that encounters between cloaked ships and PvE interests must be not only possible, but a reasonable expectation.
Rather than staring at each others names in local chat, how about on the overview and target lock user interface.

Not a forced encounter on either side, but a fun option rather than a mechanic to inspire avoidance.

The option here is what matters. The practical option which too often is missing.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
boom boom room
Perkone
Caldari State
#372 - 2014-05-06 14:11:08 UTC
I agree with the op on this one something needs to be done about cloaky campers. there is no counter for it and a lot of people dont have the option to move just make it where you have to reactivate the cloak every hour so that you have to be at the keyboard and cant just log in go afk and check every once in a while. t

if someone made a ship there was no counter to everyone would be pissy and up in arms. how is this any different there is no true counter to a cloaky afk camper which makes it unbalanced game play.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#373 - 2014-05-06 14:20:06 UTC
boom boom room wrote:
I agree with the op on this one something needs to be done about cloaky campers. there is no counter for it and a lot of people dont have the option to move just make it where you have to reactivate the cloak every hour so that you have to be at the keyboard and cant just log in go afk and check every once in a while. t

if someone made a ship there was no counter to everyone would be pissy and up in arms. how is this any different there is no true counter to a cloaky afk camper which makes it unbalanced game play.

And this is why perception is a poor substitute for objective consideration.

This player has never considered WHY cloaked ships are in the position they currently have.
If I had to guess, I would expect they never considered any view except from a PvE perspective, which sees only an opponent they can neither remove nor reliably avoid once they enter the system.

What they miss, is the cloaked player cannot catch a PvE player short of a screw-up on their part.
BOTH sides have a proven ability to avoid encounters where they are expecting a disadvantage.

Knowing this, some players try to spin this to their advantage, but with both sides having good reasons to not trust the other, the one better at bluffing ends up with the most influence.

Mr. Boom, I regret to inform you that it actually is balanced. The gameplay resolution is broken to non-existent, but it is fair in a crude way.
Balance means fair, not fun. And both sides are equally messed up regarding options to resolve this.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
boom boom room
Perkone
Caldari State
#374 - 2014-05-06 14:44:31 UTC
trust me i've done my share of camping and pvp. but tell me then o great one what is the counter to a cloaky afk camper? you can't stop him from doing it how is that fair and balanced?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#375 - 2014-05-06 14:57:17 UTC
boom boom room wrote:
trust me i've done my share of camping and pvp. but tell me then o great one what is the counter to a cloaky afk camper? you can't stop him from doing it how is that fair and balanced?

You don't know what assets he has, he doesn't know what assets you have.
Mutual lack of complete awareness.

Since neither side has an advantage, it is balanced.

What you seem to be missing, is that balance is not enough. We also need a mechanic to promote resolution between players.

That is the missing part.

We may not like it, but a stalemate only exists when all sides are balanced, otherwise things are resolved.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
boom boom room
Perkone
Caldari State
#376 - 2014-05-06 18:34:09 UTC
yes and i agree. there needs to be some sort of mechanic to stop him and eliminate him from system. or at least give the home system the option to hunt him down and kill him because baiting does not always work.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#377 - 2014-05-06 18:51:59 UTC
boom boom room wrote:
yes and i agree. there needs to be some sort of mechanic to stop him and eliminate him from system. or at least give the home system the option to hunt him down and kill him because baiting does not always work.

And, to promote opportunity on the other side, a mechanic needs to exist for him to interact with the PvE player beyond staring at a name.

I urge that mining and ratting vessels gain the ability to face off against stealth craft evenly enough to stand their ground willingly.

As a necessity, since neither side willingly submits themselves to a hotdrop, I would introduce a cyno spool up period of 30 to 60 seconds. During this spool up time, no beacon would exist, but neither could any ships jump to the cyno boat.
The beacon would appear the moment the spool up finished, and ships could then travel.

Dropping a cyno on grid to a hostile, would be effectively a self destructive act, as the PvE pilot could very likely destroy most stealth craft capable of passing a gate camp to reach them.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Theophilas
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#378 - 2014-05-07 17:14:35 UTC
Thanks to CCP's infinite wisdom, if you lite a cyno in an anom, the rats will target and kill you near instantly... this is just ONE example of many that highlight to what great lengths CCP has gone to too make it virtually impossible to kill a ratter that is smart and doesn't want to get caught.

Complaining about AFK camping isn't you worrying about dying whatsoever, it is literally you complaining about having to worry and not be AFK yourself.

It is so unbelievable to me that ratters STILL complain that null security space isn't safe despite everything CCP has done to make it near impossible to kill them.

If any of you damn PVE nerds want some tips on how to rat and never die, shoot me a PM and we can rap about it.

Writing this post made terribly sad. I'm gonna go take a self-pity nap.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#379 - 2014-05-07 17:30:29 UTC
Theophilas wrote:
Thanks to CCP's infinite wisdom, if you lite a cyno in an anom, the rats will target and kill you near instantly... this is just ONE example of many that highlight to what great lengths CCP has gone to too make it virtually impossible to kill a ratter that is smart and doesn't want to get caught.

Complaining about AFK camping isn't you worrying about dying whatsoever, it is literally you complaining about having to worry and not be AFK yourself.

It is so unbelievable to me that ratters STILL complain that null security space isn't safe despite everything CCP has done to make it near impossible to kill them.

If any of you damn PVE nerds want some tips on how to rat and never die, shoot me a PM and we can rap about it.

Writing this post made terribly sad. I'm gonna go take a self-pity nap.

Yeah...

Anyone want to send him a note about this not being what he thinks?

Mr Theophilas, you should really read this thread before jumping to that conclusion.
Noone wants PvE to get a free ride here.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Theophilas
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#380 - 2014-05-07 18:02:36 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Mr Theophilas, you should really read this thread before jumping to that conclusion.
Noone wants PvE to get a free ride here.


Yes... you do.

AFK camping interferes with your ISK per hour, so you would like CCP to nerf it.