These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#261 - 2015-01-15 03:49:53 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:


CCP has also said before that ISBoxer and other programs of its type are ok, yet they just changed their minds about it and reduced its functionality.



yeah...they didnt open a thread about it and say:

'Sorry we keep locking your repetitive threads. put all your crap here. seven threads less to close per week'

edit- and as far as i can tell, ISD made this thread. Not CCP.


True, however it is still in the F&I forums. I would hope that CCP would be paying attention.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#262 - 2015-01-15 03:55:22 UTC
I believe ISD will chime in from time to time. If they see something interesting they may pass it on. However, the chances of new debate are slim:



Trust me. This thread is less an acknowledgment of a problem. And more an acknowledgment of our privilege to discuss.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#263 - 2015-01-15 06:07:33 UTC
Well that may be true. With so many pages of dialog on the topic. It would seem fair to guess that a decent amount of the player base feels this is an issue.

Even CCP Fozzie's statement shows a lack of non commitment to the topic. His statement stands remarkably neutral on the issue.

Even if you take back my statement on CCPs views, there is still plenty of valid points on both sides to show there are flaws on both sides.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

bunzing heet
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#264 - 2015-01-15 07:35:58 UTC
Just stop cap recharge when cloaked so in time You will decloak easy peasy

Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!

Delegate
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#265 - 2015-01-15 10:51:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Delegate
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Delegate wrote:
So after these many, many words we came to an oh so predictable conclusion - you in fact believe that your null home should be your safe heaven.


Please take the time to go back and re read my posts. While I do believe that a a persons home station should be safer than if they are just roaming thru null all willy nilly, I never once stated it should be 100%. I completely understand that the black ops ships are meant to disrupt this, and I am perfectly ok with this. However if you had actually read what I stated my concern with cloak is the flaw in that a person can sit in a system for weeks on end and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I feel this is a flaw in the cloak. My statement to Mag's about the safety provided by a home system is to point out why I believe that something needs to be done. If you had taken the time to read my posts you made of understood this.


I did read your posts and waited until you will have courage to put forward your case clearly. At the end you explained yourself pretty clear in that post I quoted. It's there for anyone interested to read and draw their own conclusions. Rest is just perpetuating fog.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#266 - 2015-01-15 14:20:05 UTC
Delegate wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Delegate wrote:
So after these many, many words we came to an oh so predictable conclusion - you in fact believe that your null home should be your safe heaven.


Please take the time to go back and re read my posts. While I do believe that a a persons home station should be safer than if they are just roaming thru null all willy nilly, I never once stated it should be 100%. I completely understand that the black ops ships are meant to disrupt this, and I am perfectly ok with this. However if you had actually read what I stated my concern with cloak is the flaw in that a person can sit in a system for weeks on end and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I feel this is a flaw in the cloak. My statement to Mag's about the safety provided by a home system is to point out why I believe that something needs to be done. If you had taken the time to read my posts you made of understood this.


I did read your posts and waited until you will have courage to put forward your case clearly. At the end you explained yourself pretty clear in that post I quoted. It's there for anyone interested to read and draw their own conclusions. Rest is just perpetuating fog.


My stance is pretty clear. The only fog about it is from your own assumptions of what I wish to achieve. I encourage people to fight. I dont believe people should be in complete safety in this game. However I don't believe that the opposite should apply either. Black ops can bring in danger, thats fine. Should it be harder for them to penetrate a section of space where an alliance is clearly established, yes. If you believe otherwise, then you are mistaken on how the mechanics of war work.

What you are attempting to do is discredit my stance by making false assumptions about things and trying to state that I fit in the party of previous posters that want 100% safety. You are mistaken.

Mag's and Nikk are two of the most vocal people on this topic and even they have stated that I have valid points, though they dont agree with them.

My stance is pretty clear and has been from day one.

90% of cloaking is fine. The 10% that I see an issue with is the prolonged cloak in a system. I feel this is an issue cause once a person is in system, there is no counter to them. AFK or not a cloaked player in a system can not be removed unless that player decides to remove themselves either by leaving, or making a poor choice in a potential target.

My suggestion for a fix has be a set of probes to find cloaked players. Much like combat scan probes, these would take skill and time to deploy and lock a target and would be pretty useless against a moving target. This would be offset by the removal of all standings from local and all player information in game unless in station. This leaves intact all Black Ops fleets, bomber fleets and almost all cloak style play but offers a counter to prolonged camper. Which makes your implication that I prefer safety invalid as it is not something I advocate.

The only person adding fog to the discuss would be you. Nothing about my stance is unclear and it has not been. The only mistake I have made is in reference to the existence of this thread. I prefer to just assume that CCP is actually read it. Though in truth this is likely to be wishful thinking.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#267 - 2015-01-15 14:27:38 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
...

Which in itself leads back to why I say that a player should be able to remove a camper from a system. Where as a PVPer may view a POS or a Station as some 'tent' that a PVE player runs to for safety when PVPers show up, I dont see it that way. That tent is my home. My castle that my corp built that is used for my livelihood in EVE. I see no reason why anyone should be forced to allow a swatter to sit in system and disrupt my activities for weeks on end. It would be one thing if a great force occupied my system and I was unable to do anything, but that is not the case. As it stands now. I have to sit on my hands and just hope the camper wishes to leave at some point. No. I dont think that is fair to the players that have spent so much time and effort into building and owning the space they have.

Time to make a deal with old Nikk.

I offer you this, as a compromise:

After 6 hours present, and maintaining a cloak as active 100% of that time, a pilot will be removed from appearing in local.
At that point, all local chat information, specific to the pilot roster, will vanish for them as well.
This would reflect the technology being unable to verify the presence of this pilot, and flagging them as presumed no longer present.

(Both sides would still be able to see any chats entered into the local chat channel, but the cloaked pilot will not see the local listing of pilots, and the local listing will not include that cloaked pilot)

Now, should they decloak, the connection to the technology will be restored, and again full mutual listing will be present.

What is the trade off, for the cloaked pilot?
At the point they are no longer listed in local, they CAN BE PROBED DOWN.

Should they be genuinely AFK, well, that is an easy kill for someone.

We ARE assuming they are AFK, correct?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#268 - 2015-01-15 14:31:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Mag's wrote:
....They cannot hurt me and I them......


This I feel is not exactly true. No they can not blow up your ship. However they can collect as much intel as they need, watch undock or gather info on possible Titan pilots.
It just so happens you have also gained intel on them, because of local.
The difference being Covert Ops ships were designed with intel roles in mind. Local wasn't ever designed, as the intel tool it became.

So yes it's not exactly true, but rather highlights the broken nature of local.

Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
I dont understand why people say that Null is too safe. Null is a lawless area and its meant to be fought over, however that does not mean that there can not be areas of safety. If an alliance builds stations, puts in POSs and other things, why should this area not be safe in your home area?

It's like flying a plane into foreign air space and looking for a convoy to bomb and being shocked that all the convoys are safely in bunkers cause you were spotted. The UN wont be showing up to defend against you but the locals will and they are going to have a massive advantage cause they have a well established infrastructure.

So the idea that cloak is helping provide conflict in null and this should be left as is seems a bit odd to me. I dont advocate 100% safety but I do feel that alliances should be able to create safety with the right work.

Which in itself leads back to why I say that a player should be able to remove a camper from a system. Where as a PVPer may view a POS or a Station as some 'tent' that a PVE player runs to for safety when PVPers show up, I dont see it that way. That tent is my home. My castle that my corp built that is used for my livelihood in EVE. I see no reason why anyone should be forced to allow a swatter to sit in system and disrupt my activities for weeks on end. It would be one thing if a great force occupied my system and I was unable to do anything, but that is not the case. As it stands now. I have to sit on my hands and just hope the camper wishes to leave at some point. No. I dont think that is fair to the players that have spent so much time and effort into building and owning the space they have.
I enter a system, pilots either dock or pos up. Nerfing cloaks will not change that.

You and I have to disagree strongly here. You don't have to sit in your hands. Activities can continue. It's not the guy AFK and cloaked that calls a halt, it's you. No one AFK and cloaked ever stopped pilots using gates, modules from working, people using PvP ships and ratting, locals forming fleets etc etc. If any of that stops, it's because you decided to stop it.

Yes you may have worked for that space, you may have built things. But this means you should also work to defend it. This does not mean a nerf to decloak ships and blob people out of your space. You already have the advantage in many ways, through either man power or infrastructure.

You should have risk in null. I've lived there, I know just how safe it can be. People asking for a cloak nerf claim to be bringing risk. They are in fact removing it from their activities and that is why I disagree with only touching cloaks.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#269 - 2015-01-15 14:33:02 UTC
So if I am understanding correctly, you are basically putting a 6 hour timer on it? So if someone is afk for 6 hours, even cloaked, you could scan them down?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#270 - 2015-01-15 14:40:27 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
So if I am understanding correctly, you are basically putting a 6 hour timer on it? So if someone is afk for 6 hours, even cloaked, you could scan them down?

So long as they maintained that cloak operating non-stop for 6 hours, any time after that while still maintaining the cloak will be minus local seeing them, and they cannot see who is listed present either.

Now, Sure, they MIGHT be genuinely AFK.
Someone paying attention, realizing the name just poofed, could undock with probes and a kill squad for a nice kill-mail.

On the other hand, if the cloaked pilot is the one making more effort, and is the only one keeping track of time passing...
They could set an alarm notice, alert their own kill squad, and surprise gank someone.

Stealth, like anything involving a limit to your opponent's perception, involves a meaningful investment of time.
Snipers and assassins require enormous prep time, for that short burst of activity their opponent is aware of.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#271 - 2015-01-15 14:49:05 UTC
Mag's wrote:
It just so happens you have also gained intel on them, because of local.
The difference being Covert Ops ships were designed with intel roles in mind. Local wasn't ever designed, as the intel tool it became.

So yes it's not exactly true, but rather highlights the broken nature of local.


I can agree with this. Though I do think that CCP meant for it to be some form of intel. They did add standing colors and they do allow you to show pilot info directly from local. These are things I highly advocate removing.

Mag's wrote:
You and I have to disagree strongly here. You don't have to sit in your hands. Activities can continue. It's not the guy AFK and cloaked that calls a halt, it's you. No one AFK and cloaked ever stopped pilots using gates, modules from working, people using PvP ships and ratting, locals forming fleets etc etc. If any of that stops, it's because you decided to stop it.


I dont mean stopping operations. I am willing to risk my ships. I have several alts. Check the killboards for Marcus Behr, and you will see the lose of a Thanny. I was the only carrier willing to undock and fly into a drop on some of our freighters in a hope to save them. I can rebuild anything I lose.

What I mean by "sitting on my hands" is that I can not directly confront the camping player. Nothing I can do will force that player to take any defensive actions at all. I can have a 1000 man fleet fly in a system from point to point and its unlikely I will ever uncloak that player. This is where I see a problem. I want to fight, yet the best I can do is hope that I can bait out the player. This is the single aspect of cloak that I feel is flawed. You have two chances to catch a cloak. At a gate, or if you can bait them out.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#272 - 2015-01-15 14:59:26 UTC
Nikk wrote:
Stealth, like anything involving a limit to your opponent's perception, involves a meaningful investment of time.
Snipers and assassins require enormous prep time, for that short burst of activity their opponent is aware of.


I completely agree, however in this case its like knowing someone has locked themselves in your attic with a gun. They want to come down to shot you and you know they are up there. You can't get to them but they can get to you any time they choose. It could be while your cooking and they get you easy. OR it could be while your in your bedroom with a shotgun and they go poof. However why should this be allowed? Why cant I kick down the door and confront this person.

This is completely different than if someone stalks you from outside, suddenly bursts in your door and shots you, then runs away. This makes far more sense to me then letting someone just hide in the attic.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Mag's
Azn Empire
#273 - 2015-01-15 15:11:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
I can agree with this. Though I do think that CCP meant for it to be some form of intel. They did add standing colors and they do allow you to show pilot info directly from local. These are things I highly advocate removing.
Standings came to pass when some enterprising fellow in a large group of players, found a way of doing it. It was a matter of changing pictures in the client. So CCP instead of looking for ways to stop it, simply added it as a feature.

But they have stated many times, they wish it decoupled from intel. They have so far failed to find a way.

Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
I dont mean stopping operations. I am willing to risk my ships. I have several alts. Check the killboards for Marcus Behr, and you will see the lose of a Thanny. I was the only carrier willing to undock and fly into a drop on some of our freighters in a hope to save them. I can rebuild anything I lose.

What I mean by "sitting on my hands" is that I can not directly confront the camping player. Nothing I can do will force that player to take any defensive actions at all. I can have a 1000 man fleet fly in a system from point to point and its unlikely I will ever uncloak that player. This is where I see a problem. I want to fight, yet the best I can do is hope that I can bait out the player. This is the single aspect of cloak that I feel is flawed. You have two chances to catch a cloak. At a gate, or if you can bait them out.
Ahh my bad. A misunderstanding of your hand sitting comment. I will stand by what I said, if others use the "system shutdown" claim. (as they often do)

But I do not see that you not being able to decloak him, as a problem. Sure he may be gaining intel, but that's the point of a covert ops. Other than that, he's not a true threat until he decloaks. Then you can shoot him. But if you form fleets, take precautions and carry on, that in of itself is a victory. If you have a trap waiting and he falls for it, yet another.

On the other hand I believe it is a step too far, to be allowed a nerf to decloak and blob whomever enters your system. With only cloaks touched and all current mechanics left alone.
It simply makes life safer for those in null and rather ironic, when it is they that claim to be after more risk.

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
#274 - 2015-01-15 15:18:10 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Nikk wrote:
Stealth, like anything involving a limit to your opponent's perception, involves a meaningful investment of time.
Snipers and assassins require enormous prep time, for that short burst of activity their opponent is aware of.


I completely agree, however in this case its like knowing someone has locked themselves in your attic with a gun. They want to come down to shot you and you know they are up there. You can't get to them but they can get to you any time they choose. It could be while your cooking and they get you easy. OR it could be while your in your bedroom with a shotgun and they go poof. However why should this be allowed? Why cant I kick down the door and confront this person.

This is completely different than if someone stalks you from outside, suddenly bursts in your door and shots you, then runs away. This makes far more sense to me then letting someone just hide in the attic.

Your analogy has a fatal flaw.

You are placing yourself in a structure normally considered under your control, your home.

We are in space.

Holding sov is not the same as owning a home. It is more akin to having a builder's permit for otherwise public property.
What you can build, however, you can deny others access to, for use. This gives you leverage.

For all of that, it is still not your space, just very inconvenient for people you don't like.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#275 - 2015-01-15 15:39:23 UTC
So, according to reports, Circadian Sleepers can actually detect and scan cloaked ships. This doesn't help anyone if the cloaked ship is not at a warpable celestial, gate, or station. But it is something.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#276 - 2015-01-15 15:50:47 UTC
Nikk wrote:
Your analogy has a fatal flaw.

You are placing yourself in a structure normally considered under your control, your home.


Honestly that is over analyzing it. The analogy applies to any space. You are simply rephrased my statement and spun it to seem like something else.

Person A is in space A wanting to kill Person B. Person A is given 3 choices: Leave, Hide in a safe spot that over time can be broke, or continue to exist in space A with unknown consequences. None of the choices allow you to directly confront Person B, even though you know they are there.

Of course knowing is because of local. No direct confrontation is due to cloak. Both working, yet flawed in their own ways. To remove local but allow cloak and no detection would be like leaving Person A and B in the same room but with the lights off and person A having night vision.

The opposite of that is letting Person B just go over and pummel Person A with no real trouble at all AKA system wide decloak or some other overly powerful idea.

There should be a some middle ground.

Nikk wrote:
Holding sov is not the same as owning a home. It is more akin to having a builder's permit for otherwise public property.


This I completely disagree with and I think is opposite to the idea of Null in EVE. The space I am in is not public. It's been fought over, and the structures in place are owned by me. I can jam the system, add bridges, towers, stations, bubble gates, etc etc etc. This is a sandbox game and there is a reason they call it that. I am playing in my part of the box, I have setup all my little castles. Though no one offical is going to stop you from kicking the castles down but if you do, I will fight back AND I see no reason why you should be able to just in the middle of the area I have claimed without me reaching over and punching you in the nose.

At first it seems cute, even the drive by to knock over a castle are legit cause I would need to defend that space to stop you. But when you sit in my face, thumb your nose at me, and threaten my area, I dont understand why you feel you should be allowed to do this unopposed. The only reason you can do it is cause CCP handed you a tool that can be abused to allow such game play. Back to the sandbox analogy. The sandbox has a set of rules that people play by. Cloaked ships are the only ships that get to play by their own special rules.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#277 - 2015-01-15 15:52:30 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
So, according to reports, Circadian Sleepers can actually detect and scan cloaked ships. This doesn't help anyone if the cloaked ship is not at a warpable celestial, gate, or station. But it is something.


Interesting. I wonder if that is on purpose or just an oversight. I mean the server does know where every ship is. The seekers may just not be flagged to ignore cloaked objects.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#278 - 2015-01-15 16:06:13 UTC
I skipped the first part, as it seemed limited to your opinion about things.
Particularly, when considering that the foundation for the opinion is vested in the following section.

Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Nikk wrote:
Holding sov is not the same as owning a home. It is more akin to having a builder's permit for otherwise public property.


This I completely disagree with and I think is opposite to the idea of Null in EVE. The space I am in is not public. It's been fought over, and the structures in place are owned by me. I can jam the system, add bridges, towers, stations, bubble gates, etc etc etc. This is a sandbox game and there is a reason they call it that. I am playing in my part of the box, I have setup all my little castles. Though no one offical is going to stop you from kicking the castles down but if you do, I will fight back AND I see no reason why you should be able to just in the middle of the area I have claimed without me reaching over and punching you in the nose.

At first it seems cute, even the drive by to knock over a castle are legit cause I would need to defend that space to stop you. But when you sit in my face, thumb your nose at me, and threaten my area, I dont understand why you feel you should be allowed to do this unopposed. The only reason you can do it is cause CCP handed you a tool that can be abused to allow such game play. Back to the sandbox analogy. The sandbox has a set of rules that people play by. Cloaked ships are the only ships that get to play by their own special rules.


The fact remains, that while you can build structures, and use those structures to give you leverage, you do not own the space.

Your perception of ownership is nothing more than self deception.
You have leverage over pilots not on the approved list of your allies, nothing more.

System jamming, which you can control?
That is leverage.

Jump Bridges only your friends can use?
That is leverage.

Towers only your friends can use?
That is leverage.

Bubbling gates?
That is leverage.

It is only your part of the sandbox, until someone goes to the trouble of kicking you out of that area.
Your leverage makes it harder for them, and easier for you, but that is all it does.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#279 - 2015-01-15 16:25:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Haywoud Jablomi
Nikk seriously? Why state that you skipped the first part and make a passive aggressive attempt to make it sound like it was just opinionated ramble, when you make reference to it and make it clear you read it anyway. Really man.

Either way you wish to phrase it. It is the same thing. Leverage, ownership, etc etc etc. In the context of EVE they are all the same thing, though your view of it seems to different from mine.

Let's go very basic.

I am in a frigate you are in a frigate. You are cloaked. I am not. Let even say they are the same ship but with one having a cloak and one missing a high slot.

I want to fight you..... Oh wait. I cant. I cant seem to find you. Here, let me float in space for a minute. Maybe I can bait you. Hmm you didnt fall for it. Maybe I can jump to the next system and catch you on the gate if you follow..... Hmmm nope. Well it would seem my only option is to leave you alone. But wait. If I do that I am a carebear and I am running away from a fight.....odd how that works.

Now lets say you want to fight. D scan. Get an idea where I am. warp around, find me floating off a planet. Get to optimal, decloak, lock fire. With equal DPS you will win cause you get the first shot.

That's balanced? Nothing I can do will ever threaten you while you are cloaked. Nothing. This is where I see a flaw in cloak.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#280 - 2015-01-15 16:54:10 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
1 Nikk seriously? Why state that you skipped the first part and make a passive aggressive attempt to make it sound like it was just opinionated ramble, when you make reference to it and make it clear you read it anyway. Really man.

Either way you wish to phrase it. It is the same thing. Leverage, ownership, etc etc etc. In the context of EVE they are all the same thing, though your view of it seems to different from mine.

2 Let's go very basic.

I am in a frigate you are in a frigate. You are cloaked. I am not. Let even say they are the same ship but with one having a cloak and one missing a high slot.

I want to fight you..... Oh wait. I cant. I cant seem to find you. Here, let me float in space for a minute. Maybe I can bait you. Hmm you didnt fall for it. Maybe I can jump to the next system and catch you on the gate if you follow..... Hmmm nope. Well it would seem my only option is to leave you alone. But wait. If I do that I am a carebear and I am running away from a fight.....odd how that works.

Now lets say you want to fight. D scan. Get an idea where I am. warp around, find me floating off a planet. Get to optimal, decloak, lock fire. With equal DPS you will win cause you get the first shot.

3 That's balanced? Nothing I can do will ever threaten you while you are cloaked. Nothing. This is where I see a flaw in cloak.


1
Your basis for the right to confront this cloaked opponent is based on a contested concept of ownership.
I am arguing against this claim being valid, pointing out you do not own the space, what you own is the permission to build on it.
Access to the space is always open, to everyone.
Including cloaked pilots, who are under no obligation to play according to your expectations.

Leverage is most certainly not ownership.
Leverage, in this context, gives you an advantage against opposing players.
Ownership implies the claim that the contest has ended, and nothing remains to be proven.

2
Your desire to fight me, in this context, means nothing if I am not accessible.
I could be docked in an Outpost, behind POS shields, logged out of the game, or simply cloaked.
You have the option, in your sov space, to build and use Outposts and POS towers.
You have the option, in any space, to cloak (if equipped), or log out.

I cannot use your Outposts or POS towers without your permission, in your space. That is HUGE, as advantages go.
I cannot simply bring in overwhelming forces to destroy these, with the expectation that I can catch you.
You will have the ability to leave, despite my best efforts, if your skills and timing are up to it.

All I can do, in your space, is cloak or log out.

3
You can select a ship like I did, accept the fitting penalties along with possible hull penalties in some cases, and mount a cloak as well.
You make it seem like duplicating my tactics, and using them against me, is not an option for you.

Then I get to ask:
HOW am I supposed to mine in the local asteroid fields, with your name hanging over me in local?
Clearly you seem hostile, and would blow up my Prospect on sight, so I must remain hidden.
I cannot decloak you, I cannot make you leave the POS, I cannot make you undock from that Outpost.
You clearly have the advantage in this space, thanks to your holding SOV....

And you want to make me to either log out of the game, or drop my cloak?
I feel my play style is being diminished by this state of affairs.