These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Cloak Fuel - A cure to afk cloaking
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
StukaBee
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2011-11-27 14:03:13 UTC
GuRasta wrote:
1) ppl in wspace do ***** about covert drops, working on a site then out of no where 10 cloakies on overview, but also usually have RR fleets much better suited to fend off cloakies, also they can monitor and collpse the wh's in their system, providing them protection


What is preventing ratters using those same RR PvE gangs in regular 0.0 space to defend against PvP?
Sealy
The Huskarl's
#62 - 2011-11-27 14:04:38 UTC
If you have a periodic popup someone can make a macro to acknowledge this, If you make a periodic popup that pops up in a random place on the screen, someone can make a macro to find it and click on it.

Costing fuel to run a covert ops cloaking device is a good idea but again if it is known how long the fuel will last they could move a can into system a refuel on a timer / macro also.

Encouraging macro miners/pve/bots, well what does this really matter, there is so much ISK in the game from PLEX and GTC,c how much does it really matter (Isk in the game is another problem as Mega corps have so much it doesn’t matter)

The one way I thought to counter this is: -
For every cycle of the covert ops cloaking device it increases the cap usage by a random amount, so eventually it would kill the cap, If your cap runs with the cloaking device enabled it causes a fail safe which switches off the cloaking device for 5min and causes a signature bloom of a battle ship. This would stop all AFK cloaked pilots and if it happens to a real playing person they would have to jump around the system for 5 min during the cool down. It means they would have to watch there system for the capacitor. With this you could increase the amount reactivation time between turn on and off dependant on the time it has been activated, you don’t know what it is until you turn it off. Causing the covert ops pilot to move off and fly around until the timer has ended

Yes they could make a bot which could watch this and yes they could make a bot to switch the cloaking on and off every 5 min.
Gwen Severine
DATASTORM Industries
#63 - 2011-11-27 15:14:43 UTC
Grow some cojones and deal with it, or go back to hisec and run L4s.
Pelador Rova
No Luck Corp
#64 - 2011-11-27 15:15:11 UTC
I personally don't want to see EvE turning into an environment of "nerfing" things just because of botters.

Your just letting botters win that way. As they will just focus on something else, then that will get nerfed, could end up as a way to force a nerf. Mind I don't think CCP would want to take this stance of taking the fun out of the game because of botting issues.

Maybe CCP needs to find a way of dealing with botting in all its forms.

Otherwise, I don't think the use of cloaking is "broken" so can be kept as is imho.
Hypnagogia Ichinumi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#65 - 2011-11-27 18:09:07 UTC
I'm gonna start off by saying I didn't read any of this thread past the first sentence of the OP.

The problem is not that a single cloaker "can shut down an entire alliances PVE for as long as they wish." The problem is people being afraid to play a game based on risk when there is even a slight hint of danger.

Seriously, man up. There is an AFK cloaker in system. You know what that AFK means? It means more likely than not, that person is not at their computer. And if they are, they're pretending not to be so you think they are AFK.

If you're in null, where this is apparently a problem, you should be used to the idea of constant danger. Go about your business and be aware that you could be jumped at any time. Check Dscan for decloaks. Watch overview for an enemy on grid. Stay aligned. Its not hard.

Sure, once in a while you'll get ganked and lose that ship - but if you're doing your ratting or whatever while that person actually is AFK, you should be making more than you lose. Eve is a game of loss. If you don't want to lose anything, don't play.
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#66 - 2011-11-27 22:37:13 UTC
The subject of AFK Cloaking is laughable, because people always complain about a pilot doing something that they have no way of verifying. With any given passive activity in Eve (of which intel gathering is often one), you have no way of knowing what the pilot on the other side of the screen is doing.

Almost every suggestion I've seen on "fixing" this imaginary monster has involved some form change that magically would also make things more difficult for the *active* cloakers, and that is what all these threads are really about. "AFK Cloaking" is the convenient excuse used to justify the real intent of nerfing cloaking and recon in general.

You aren't afraid of the AFK person, you're afraid of the person who is actively gathering intel or moving into position for an attack.

Cloaking is working exactly as it should, and doesn't need to be changed.

Profit favors the prepared
Foghail
Sons of Chaos and Anarchy
#67 - 2011-11-27 22:57:06 UTC
Sealy wrote:
If you have a periodic popup someone can make a macro to acknowledge this, If you make a periodic popup that pops up in a random place on the screen, someone can make a macro to find it and click on it.

Costing fuel to run a covert ops cloaking device is a good idea but again if it is known how long the fuel will last they could move a can into system a refuel on a timer / macro also.

Encouraging macro miners/pve/bots, well what does this really matter, there is so much ISK in the game from PLEX and GTC,c how much does it really matter (Isk in the game is another problem as Mega corps have so much it doesn’t matter)

The one way I thought to counter this is: -
For every cycle of the covert ops cloaking device it increases the cap usage by a random amount, so eventually it would kill the cap, If your cap runs with the cloaking device enabled it causes a fail safe which switches off the cloaking device for 5min and causes a signature bloom of a battle ship. This would stop all AFK cloaked pilots and if it happens to a real playing person they would have to jump around the system for 5 min during the cool down. It means they would have to watch there system for the capacitor. With this you could increase the amount reactivation time between turn on and off dependant on the time it has been activated, you don’t know what it is until you turn it off. Causing the covert ops pilot to move off and fly around until the timer has ended

Yes they could make a bot which could watch this and yes they could make a bot to switch the cloaking on and off every 5 min.


Hate ***** and whine all you like guys, by far this is one of the more realistic suggestions to date, as to dealing with Botting and cloaks that is a completely other matter, to date other then when someone is SCREAMING on the forums about it, or blabbing on another website very little is done about it by ccp as these guys continue to keep their accounts in good standings. Botting is prohibited in eve and if they want to gamble their accounts like that so be it.

Lets focus on the problem at hand that's being discussed. In short cloak fuel although a great idea, at this stage I think is needlessly complex component to add to the game (btw fuel bay for it), as to a general cap failure with a cooldown on the cloak, the idea is brilliant. As a Recon/Blackop pilot i welcome this change, being able to cloak indefinitely in a system with 8 accounts scattered around is a game breaking mechanic, how many times have you jumped into system dropped probes and presto the guy cloaks up, if my probes are deployed and i'm patient i should get a shot at getting him, they've got a pos/station they can haul ass to if they need the womb, otherwise when the cap drains down be ready for combat, btw, if you use a cloak, you should have an aggression timer (this is needed immediately) so no more cloak and dc, cycle finish's and we have time to find you - anothe nice way of us dealing with AFK cloakers when they do periodically disconnect, the Sig Bloom is BRILLIANT as well helping to mitigate time to scan down. You cloaky killers claim to want PVP here's a valid solution that Im sure would satisfy both parties.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#68 - 2011-11-28 00:19:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
GuRasta wrote:
ppl in wspace […] usually have RR fleets much better suited to fend off cloakies, also they can monitor and collpse the wh's in their system, providing them protection
…and thus the myth that there is nothing you can do about “AFK cloakers” is proven utterly false. The problem is that people refuse to do anything about it and keep QQing about how CCP should do something that they already have ample tools and opportunity to do themselves.
Quote:
How the hell do cloaks shut down botters? you jump in a system some1 is botting in and they warp to safe and cloak and are invulnerable
…and thus are shut down. AFK cloaking is probably be most devastating weapon we players currently have against bots. That's the funny thing about them: even without a psyche, bots are 100% susceptible to psychological warfare. Twisted
Endeavour Starfleet
#69 - 2011-11-28 09:19:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
Gerrick Palivorn wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Activating a cloak disconnects you from the local channel.


I can really get on board with this. Cloaking disconnects you from local, so they can't see you, but you can't see them either.

It would legitamize the black ops fleets and hunters moving in the same time as the fleets they'll be dropping.

EDIT: Fun fact, I'm afk cloaking your system right now...


100 percent proof of the reason you never post with your main on this forum. You get revenge AFKers such as this person.

Also nerfing local = huge additional power for large alliances. Period
Legion Reaver
#70 - 2011-11-28 09:39:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Legion Reaver
Solution to afk cloaker?

Run sites in groups rather than solo? I mean you only need one person to tank the sites or a logistics following a few people around fitted with buffer tanks and geared for pvp and problem is solved maybe? Sure slightly less isk individually but more fun had by all? maybe? just maybe?

Expand "local" to constellation range? Makes things even more paranoid?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#71 - 2011-11-28 09:43:17 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Gerrick Palivorn wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Activating a cloak disconnects you from the local channel.


I can really get on board with this. Cloaking disconnects you from local, so they can't see you, but you can't see them either.

It would legitamize the black ops fleets and hunters moving in the same time as the fleets they'll be dropping.

EDIT: Fun fact, I'm afk cloaking your system right now...


100 percent proof of the reason you never post with your main on this forum. You get revenge AFKers such as this person.

Also nerfing local = huge additional power for large alliances. Period
I'll repeat this again, as you seem to have comprehension issues.

No one with any sense of balance (this includes CCP), would remove local without a replacement package of changes to take it's place. Removing local wouldn't mean the end of intel, it would mean the need to work for it instead of getting it handed to you on a plate. It's the 100%, effortless, instant and risk free nature of it that we object to.

Maybe you could answer my question? I doubt you will, you've had ample opportunity in the past in your nerf cloaks thread. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Branquinha
Thirtyplus
Goonswarm Federation
#72 - 2011-11-28 10:07:47 UTC
I would prefer something a bit more random:
every 10 minutes in average some random event would threaten to break cloak and send an all out 100% signature on the map alerting everyone in system.

To prevent macros i would use messages like "The module X is overloading due to cloak click module X to keep cloak you have 2 minutes" showing up randomly on screen with variations like "The module X is overloading due to cloak cl1ck m o d u l e X to keep cloak you have 2 minutes"
Kind of like some forums human verification, you miss click module another message shows up telling you to click same or different module max 3 attempts.
Nothing will happen of course because you are cloaked but it will in my opinion kill the AFK issue since guessing from a macro which module to push is at best very very hard.
StukaBee
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#73 - 2011-11-28 10:08:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
The problem is that people refuse to do anything about it and keep QQing about how CCP should do something that they already have ample tools and opportunity to do themselves.


but but but but but taking those basic precautions rather than mindlessly ratting in an ISK-optimised PvP-vulnerable ship might cost them a couple of percent of their income!

Clearly this is an unacceptable compromise to make and a better solution is for CCP to remove all risk of PvP to their deadspace AFK Golems.
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2011-11-28 10:30:38 UTC
I don't agree with these proposals to make cloaking reliability random and then above all things turn you into a flashing bulls eye. This is a considerably worse nerf imho to the use of cloaking without any real cause or purpose. In fact the idea is so bad it would make cloaking products unlikley to even get "off the shelves" with such poor unpredicatable behaviour putting the user at considerable risk.

Since cloaking is the primary defence for those specialised craft and have their PvP potential characteristics "trimmed" accordingly it doesn't in any way make it fair to expect this kind of effectiveness from cloaks. In some situations it totally removes the purpose of the cloaked vessel altogether.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#75 - 2011-11-28 10:43:34 UTC
GuRasta wrote:
AFK cloaking has become one of the key issues with EVE, 1 person can shut down an entire alliances PVE for as long as they wish. Faction battleships people have worked hard on sit in hanger and don't get used, and how many do you think log on to play, notice and afk cloaker and no pvp ops atm and just change skills and log off instead of actually playing the game? I know many including me that do it all the time. Sure, you can try to trap, until you get hotdropped by 20-40, it is normal protocol for almost EVERY nullsec alliance to just not rat with a cloak in system afk or not. Removing local is not the answer until a balanced way to protect your pve ships can be found, currently that would result in jumping in system 10 sec dscan for sancs and in under 30 secs have a faction bs pointed? That would obviously be hugely imbalanced. It Is time something be done to balance nullsec pve, with the changes to nullsec going to truesec no longer can an alliance just upgrade 4 systems in a row, causing 4 afk cloakers to be required. It is time something be done to prevent afk cloaking while not effecting much else, this would be a HUGE difference to nullsec pve and would encourage more ppl to play by giving them options other than station spinning. The current system makes 1 smug and 30 annoyed and discourages play, it should be apparent it is not good for the longevity of EVE online.

The Solution: Cloaks should require something along the lines of "liquid Nitrogen" to "cool your thermal signature"

By causing every cycle of the cloak to consume some fuel from cargo it would effectively prevent afk cloaking, while having almost no effect on active cloakers or pvp. It would be a huge boost to nullsec pve, give players more options when they sign on, and stop the 20-30 ppl being annoyed over 1 person cloaking then going to work, if you need to be gone that long players should be forced to log off. It is time something to be done to correct this issue, as I and many others I'm sure strongly believe it is in the best interest for EVE and its future.


doesnt that make sense to sit in a system with many potential targets, regardless if afk or not??
If a person decides to spend a whole paid account for that, why not?? Its a valid decision - does make sense totally. Its actually your fault and greed squeezing a horde of ratters in one single system, turning it very easy and profitable to camp by hostiles. Your fault, noone else. Why do you think your playstyle should get priority over others? Its not cloakers fault you having 50 tards in one system who dont know what to do else apart from ratting.

Oh and btw, if "no pvp is going on", then do some! Null sec is not only about ratting.

Your suggestion just makes a need of another hauler alt with topes in the same system.
Anshio Tamark
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#76 - 2011-11-28 12:34:00 UTC
Aesiron wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Oh... this thread again.

Not Supported.


How about you post something decent for once instead of trolling?

He's got a point, though. CCP has more important things to work on than breaking the one game-mechanic that works as intended. Okay, so there's a cloaked ship in your Alliance null-sec system. Tough luck. You chose to be there, so you should be ready to face the consequences. Besides, chances are that a PVE-gang can easily kill a single cloaked ship before it gets reinforcements.

Furthermore, most people I know actually only go AFK while docked. If someone cloaks in space, they can still be found and killed, thus making afk-cloaking more dangerous than most pirates whine about.

Bottom line: Cloaking works properly and should not be fixed. End of discussion.

PS: Now, can we get something original to discuss?
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
#77 - 2011-11-28 12:36:33 UTC
Quote:
1 person can shut down an entire alliances PVE for as long as they wish.


Read the OP until this line, Laughed and stopped reading.

Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#78 - 2011-11-28 14:18:15 UTC
Cloaking is fine as it is. Just remove cloaked ships from local then nobody is scared by AFK cloakers any more.
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2011-11-28 15:15:42 UTC
GuRasta, /AFK cloakers can be a real pain, I agree.

However, the response that Venus Rinah has given was extremely detailed and accurate. You can't get angry with her for pointing out that your solution is flawed and just dismiss everything she says.

Your solution is awful for most non /afk cloak users. You did define "2 hours" as the reasonable limit that ships would be able to carry fuel for. Your own counter argument to fit Expanded Cargoholds and Cargo rigs to carry more fuel is most likely to be followed by the /AFK cloaker than other users of cloaks. You can't expect an SB to fit them, but what about a Kestrel who's only task is to cloak up?

In my limited experience of Sov Null Sec the real problem is that the alliances are too big and lethargic. They might have 1 or 2 FCs who can put together a massive fleet to contest soverignity of a system, but there is no organisation at the lower level. 30 people will cower in a station because nobody can be bothered to form a fleet, get on voice and issue a few standard operating proceedures to mutually support each other. So what if you get hot dropped once or twice a month. Usually the moment the cyno goes up everyone bales, rarely more than 3 or 4 people get caught and if it happens too regularly you have the makings of a trap of your own to counter drop them.
Tekkera
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2011-11-28 17:36:21 UTC
grazer gin wrote:
Or you could grow some balls and realise nullsec isnt a 100% safe place for all you pathetic carebears


^ winner