These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#401 - 2015-01-20 18:07:59 UTC
Cloaking needs to use ingame fuel (perhaps from PI ?), when the fuel bay (can not be opened by a shortcut !) is empty you de-cloak Cool

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#402 - 2015-01-20 18:21:22 UTC
So....by the numbers

1. Though you dont know the when, you know the where and that in itself is enough. I will leave you to figure out how you kill someone on the undock or from a POS. You are a smart enough player to know how to accomplish this. The argument that cloaking = hiding in POS/Station is simply invalid. In both cases you know here the player is, what they are in for the most part. Untrue with a cloaked ship. Wont even touch the idea of the cost of stations and POS vs the cost of a cloaked ship.

2. The idea that an "AFK cloak" is not hostile unless they are visible is also invalid and his been shown several times already. The threat of a hot drop is in itself a hostile act, as well as intel that can be gained from simply watching a station undock. These are just two examples of hostile actions coming from a cloaked target and they are gained by the cloaked pilot with minimal risk.

3. As for this idea. Where exactly in the game of EVE has it ever been stated that hunting a PVE ship should be easy. I dont advocate complete safety cause I think it makes the game boring, but having lived in Null 90% of my EVE career when a threat comes close, miners and ratters will dock up. With my corp and alliance we often will form up to combat the invaded threat, which often time results in the invalid force leaving, especially if we bring equal numbers. Your push for cloak to stay the same is from the point of view of gaining easy kills and not wanting to risk your ship to actual combat ships. Maybe not you specifically but that is how the argument here is panning out. If you are really dedicated to PVP you would just go to low sec and spend about 10 minutes at a gate and get all you need.

Let me explain to you why you see local as being broken. You can blame this on N3, Goons, Test and any other major alliance that makes their money off of renting. They claim to own space. They rent it to industrials. This in itself creates a massive network that an alliance can call their space. Now from a simply logical point of view, why exactly do you feel that a PVP ship should be able to penetrate an alliances space without being detected so they can prey on miners or ratters. If those players are several jumps into alliance space, I personally dont see any way you should be able to just fly in and attack them without a lot of work. Now you claim that AFK cloaking is meant to combat this exact mentality, however I personally see it as an abuse of a tool CCP created.

I personally feel that what you advocate in keeping cloak as it is goes against the ideas of CCP is attempting to create. What benefit does it create to be able to sit in a system for a month, waiting for that perfect kill. All you are doing is basically griefing.

Local itself isnt broken. If you enter a system owned by a single corp and they are all mining. You have a very high chance of tackling a mining barge before they can dock, even with them seeing you. The combat ship has the speed to do that. However this is not the same if you fly 10 jumps into alliance territory and expect their intel networks to not have seen you.

Local only works in one system. The intel channels are what spreads the news. You shouldnt be fighting to fix local but instead to limit the intel channels.

The type of AFK cloaking that people are complaining about is the type that is used as a griefing tool. No one wants to destroy bombers, or cov ops or anything like that, though what you are seeking is justification to be able to grief PVE ships deep in alliance territory.

This is why I feel there is a flaw in cloak. I think it can be abused and this is my justification on why I feel that way and why I would like to see them changed in this single regard.

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
#403 - 2015-01-20 18:22:11 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:
Cloaking needs to use ingame fuel (perhaps from PI ?), when the fuel bay (can not be opened by a shortcut !) is empty you de-cloak Cool

With the creation of a limitation to cloaking, the need arises for a mechanic to justify use of cloaked ships with this time limitation.

How will we limit the ability of their expected targets to avoid them, so resolution can fit within their available time window?
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#404 - 2015-01-20 18:38:36 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Freelancer117 wrote:
Cloaking needs to use ingame fuel (perhaps from PI ?), when the fuel bay (can not be opened by a shortcut !) is empty you de-cloak Cool

With the creation of a limitation to cloaking, the need arises for a mechanic to justify use of cloaked ships with this time limitation.


There is no limitation (to the effect of cloaking) , it can still operate as before.

* However I have heard Circadian Seekers (new sleeper drones) can penetrate the cloaking effect and still find you, so no idea what CCP will give us in the future to penetrate (any) cloaking Cool

There will be a time limitation of cloaking when it needs the use of fuel and a fixed size fuel bay per ship.
(disclaimer: I am not a junior game designer so this is just my pov)

Quote:
How will we limit the ability of their expected targets to avoid them, so resolution can fit within their available time window?


Could you elaborate this please, I do not understand

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#405 - 2015-01-20 18:43:55 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
....

The type of AFK cloaking that people are complaining about is the type that is used as a griefing tool. No one wants to destroy bombers, or cov ops or anything like that, though what you are seeking is justification to be able to grief PVE ships deep in alliance territory.

This is why I feel there is a flaw in cloak. I think it can be abused and this is my justification on why I feel that way and why I would like to see them changed in this single regard.

It is only a griefing tool, if the cloaked player is able to force others into behavior they would not otherwise choose.

Please explain how this is being forced, rather than chosen.

As to your numbers:

1
Declaring one form of avoidance as invalid, but allowing others, is not balanced.
As to knowing a ship is docked in an Outpost you lack access to.... psychic powers maybe?
The POS is even worse, as a cloaked ship could come under automatic fire if it's cloak were to drop.

2
Hostility is a form of intent.
The cloaked ship is not capable of acting on that intent, without first dropping it's cloak.
I believe we are all clear that it is no longer a cloaked ship at that point.
Whether it is more dangerous than the ship(s) on grid with it, is another matter entirely.

3
Hunting a PvE ship, within the confines of space which is under friendly sov to it, is certainly not easy.
In fact, it can be demonstrated that it is not possible to successfully execute, short of that PvE ship's pilot making at least one significant error.
I submit, that every kill mail of a PvE ship within space that was sov friendly to it, all involved pilot error to some degree.
It may be human nature to have flaws, and make mistakes, but it is questionable game design to make such a requirement prior to vulnerability.

You seem to want an entirely separate game to exist, where PvE ships in friendly sov space are concerned.
You further seem put out, that you believe you are being blocked from this game, when you chose to avoid uncertainty and risk due to assumptions about a pilot flying a ship of unknown virtue.

You don't need to dock.
Fight back, and if the concealed foe knows you are ready to do this, there is a reasonable expectation they won't bother you at all.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#406 - 2015-01-20 18:50:06 UTC
Vulfen wrote:

Im not saying it should be a harsh change, theres no reason for a non cov ops ship to spend more than 15 minutes cloaked (safe log off timer) so i would aim for it to be set for around that time, with cov ops based ships able to spend more like 1 hour cloaked before any concern. (before any rigs)


So I have to stop playing EVE if something enters local I cannot deal with while flying a cloaky mega and I cannot use scouts to keep an eye on the on grid activities of a defense fleet that has a lot of drag bubbles around it.


Vulfen wrote:
If you take a look at SIFI in general cloaking devices generally require a massive amount of power, however in eve you can just cloak with no cost.


You can not use any mod of any kind while cloaked.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#407 - 2015-01-20 18:52:18 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
...How will we limit the ability of their expected targets to avoid them, so resolution can fit within their available time window?


Could you elaborate this please, I do not understand

Cloaked pilots are only able to provoke their targets into exposing themselves, by fooling these same targets into disregarding local.
They disregard the hostile name in local, since they believe the pilot cannot possibly be active over such an extended period of time. (Technically, they are correct, we players all need to eat and sleep, if not attend to jobs and families as well)

If the time is limited to a significantly shorter window, then the confusion over whether the pilot is active becomes reduced.
The pilot has to return, reload that fuel tank, or leave entirely.
Thinking that this is a ship with noone paying attention to it, becomes far less believable.

Cloaked ships, with rate of success reduced so meaningfully, become less used entirely in this attempt to catch PvE.

PvE reward index is reduced, owing to demonstrable lack of ability to be threatened within friendly sov space.
(Getting ganked in high sec becomes measurably more likely, than getting hunted in friendly sov space)

My mining becomes very dull.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#408 - 2015-01-20 18:53:08 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Doddy wrote:
AFK cloaking is no different to being afk in station or afk in a pos. Keep them all as they are or nerf them all.

Cloaking in general is a counter to local, keep them both as they are or nerf them both.

Nerf Afk cloaking specifically or cloaking in general without nerfing these other things and it will just kill the game even more.


This is false in every sense. POS can be destroyed. A station can change hands, reinforced or taken. Though you cant eject the player, you always know where they are, and if they undock you know exactly where they will be.

None of these are true with a "AFK cloaker". As I said a few posts ago. They can stay cloaked safely in a system with minimal effort till the EVE servers are closed.



A station cannot change hands or lock people out. And AFK player in a station is exactly the same as an AFK cloaker.
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
#409 - 2015-01-20 19:10:48 UTC
Gabriel Elarik wrote:
Nothing should be 100% safe in eve

make a safe cloak 100% safe thats wrong nothing else as long as he is cloaked he cant harm anyone


I agree, cloaking should not be 100% safe (hint it is now), how people are not up in arms about this I have literally no idea considering how much they hate on hs freightors, 250 caps circle jerk repping each other ect ect.

I have seen this dead horse beaten often, and there will be no change i'm sure this time around. The fact that so many individuals vehemently defend the permanent duration of the cloaking module just astounds me. I have no problem with someone who wishes to cloaky camp a system, but you should have to be paying at least a modicum of attention to do so. (also i haven't done PVE in YEARS so i really dont have a horse in the race other than pointing out players inconsistent viewpoints).

I think the part that gets me the most is this particular line is that people have perfect intel with local and ls/ns shouldn't be that safe. Okay I don't completely disagree, but that local works both ways, both parties have perfect Intel on who in system, so its effectively balanced. The irony is the safety said cloak camper has, the only way a cloaky camper is dieing, is if he is mentally incapable. He has 100% engagement control, he can pick the fight, and trust me no cloaky camper is going to pick a fight he thinks he has even a slim chance of losing. The only trap that really can be laid is a counter drop on a bait carrier or something, but since most BLOPS are MJD fit, they use their coward module and are out before the first counter dropper loads grid.

So please tell me how this equation is balanced (hint, its not), I will grant you though that this is more than just cloak rebalancing, this is issues with modules like MJD's and at the end of the day the amount of time it takes to load system (which isn't likely to change anytime soon)

Further more as is often cited in eve, a group of people should always be stronger than a single individual, cloaky camping is one of a very few instances left in eve where this is inverted, a single individual has the ability to do much more damage than the group. Again the cries of perfect local intel would be heard and the THIS ISNT A PROBLEM IN WORMHOLES JUST REMOVE LOCAL. The WH argument doesnt apply at all because you cant light these things called cyno in wormholes, BLOPS or otherwise, so what you have in system is what you get and all your entrances have mass limitations, and finally, your PVE content is worth ALOT more cash, than null or low. You would basically have to remove jump drives from the game, or seriously up the payout of null pve activities to balance the risk versus reward equation of a no local or delyaed local nullsec.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#410 - 2015-01-20 19:13:01 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
A station cannot change hands or lock people out. And AFK player in a station is exactly the same as an AFK cloaker.


In what world do you live in where a station can not change hands or deny access. It happens all the time in Null

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)

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#411 - 2015-01-20 19:24:35 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
A station cannot change hands or lock people out. And AFK player in a station is exactly the same as an AFK cloaker.


In what world do you live in where a station can not change hands or deny access. It happens all the time in Null


It has never happened in null sec or any other area of space save for people in FW.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#412 - 2015-01-20 19:39:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
A station cannot change hands or lock people out. And AFK player in a station is exactly the same as an AFK cloaker.


In what world do you live in where a station can not change hands or deny access. It happens all the time in Null


It has never happened in null sec or any other area of space save for people in FW.


...........

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)

Jenshae Chiroptera
#413 - 2015-01-20 19:53:49 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Sorry, but not everyone that is caught ratting in null does so because they make a mistake; it's still entirely possible for players to be caught even if they're doing everything right and react appropriately, despite local..
Agreed. The mechanics are weighted in the aggressor's favour.
Doddy wrote:
AFK cloaking is no different to being afk in station or ...
Show me a station that flies about a solar system, can't be bubbled on the undock and can hot drop people. Then your argument might have a leg to stand on. Blink

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#414 - 2015-01-20 20:51:49 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Sorry, but not everyone that is caught ratting in null does so because they make a mistake; it's still entirely possible for players to be caught even if they're doing everything right and react appropriately, despite local..

Agreed. The mechanics are weighted in the aggressor's favour.

Indeed?
So, Let's say I am in a friendly sov system.
I am bookmarked to a POS safe spot.
I fly aligned to that spot.
I see a name that is not friendly get added to the pilot's list.
I warp.

At what point can the hostile interrupt this chain of events?
What if I took the time, and had anchored a bubble on the incoming gate too?

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Doddy wrote:
AFK cloaking is no different to being afk in station or ...

Show me a station that flies about a solar system, can't be bubbled on the undock and can hot drop people. Then your argument might have a leg to stand on. Blink

Show me a PvE ship that is vulnerable to becoming a kill mail, while docked in a station.
It can't be bubbled, hot dropped, or otherwise interacted with.
It can still see who is present in the system.
It can play with the market, fit new ships, or undock in something PvP fit. This includes nullified ships which can zip past that potential bubble, cloak up on it's own, and also zip about the system at that point.

But sure, that ship which MIGHT be paying attention, had to be fast and agile enough to slip past our defending gate camps, and is willing to spike hundreds of millions of ISK bridging ships over to catch me... IT has the advantage?

My lil procurer probably cost less than it did. And my friends would be delighted to punch the dropper's return ticket for them.

I am betting my ISK lost breakdown is NOTHING compared to theirs....
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association
Local Is Primary
#415 - 2015-01-20 20:52:47 UTC
So they Break (oh you mean fix) cloaking so that it is no longer persistent as you desire.

I wonder how long it would take for the complaints to begin about the almost unprobable cheap frigate cyno alt that can sit at a safespot all day and then catch you just as you warp to an anomaly for your PvE pleasure?

Griffin
Low: Micro Auxilliary Power Core II
Low: Micro Auxilliary Power Core II

Med: Conjuctive Gravi ECCM Scanning Array I
Med: Conjuctive Gravi ECCM Scanning Array I
Med: Experimental 10Mn AB I
Med: Warp Disruptor II
Med: Hypnos Multispec ECM I

High: Cyno
High:

Rigs: 3x Small Ancilliary Current Router I


Sensor Strength: 73+
Sig Radius: 42m
max straight line speed: 1991m/s (w/o implands and bonus's)

Oh look there is an alt in my system with a 7M isk ship and he is disrupting my PvE activities and I can only catch him if I use a high skilled SP fully augmented clone with expert skills and a very fast ship after probing him down twice to catch him.

It's so broken it must be nerfed nerfed nerfed just like afk cloaking. Until I am safe behind my local based region wide intel network that tells me well in advance if there is a threat to my bubble locked dead end system and my PvE activities.

What a waste of a thread this is.

There is not enough argument with compromise that accepts there are a number of parties that require improved gameplay.

Oh and I'm waiting to hear your explanation to the Supercap pilots. Those who need to stop playing in their mutibillion ships due to RL and cannot cloak safely or log off safely at a moments notice because the cloak will run out or they will be probed within the 3 mins they have to disappear and will be agressed for a perma-aggression until they are podded.

So far the nerf cloaks because of afk cloaking arguments, I have seen, are all narrow in scope and completely unbalanced.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#416 - 2015-01-20 20:57:22 UTC
Nikk wrote:
You seem to want an entirely separate game to exist, where PvE ships in friendly sov space are concerned.
You further seem put out, that you believe you are being blocked from this game, when you chose to avoid uncertainty and risk due to assumptions about a pilot flying a ship of unknown virtue.

You don't need to dock.
Fight back, and if the concealed foe knows you are ready to do this, there is a reasonable expectation they won't bother you at all.


I am not sure if you are willfully being ignorant of what I and others are saying or just not understanding. My statements, killboards and suggestions have been the complete opposite of what you just stated.

I made one clear statement. AFK cloak camping a system for a prolonged time seems to be a flaw in the cloak and I would prefer to see it changed. I have offered several reasons on why its a flaw, so have may others. Several people have made very valid points on why cloak is flawed.

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)

Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association
Local Is Primary
#417 - 2015-01-20 21:34:50 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:


I made one clear statement. AFK cloak camping a system for a prolonged time seems to be a flaw in the cloak



I'd accept "begins with a flaw in the cloak"

However, no solution has been presented that tackles the far reaching consequences of changing the cloak mechanism and the cause and effect the changes have, once you extrapolate out of a single situation type.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#418 - 2015-01-20 21:35:33 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Nikk wrote:
You seem to want an entirely separate game to exist, where PvE ships in friendly sov space are concerned.
You further seem put out, that you believe you are being blocked from this game, when you chose to avoid uncertainty and risk due to assumptions about a pilot flying a ship of unknown virtue.

You don't need to dock.
Fight back, and if the concealed foe knows you are ready to do this, there is a reasonable expectation they won't bother you at all.


I am not sure if you are willfully being ignorant of what I and others are saying or just not understanding. My statements, killboards and suggestions have been the complete opposite of what you just stated.

I made one clear statement. AFK cloak camping a system for a prolonged time seems to be a flaw in the cloak and I would prefer to see it changed. I have offered several reasons on why its a flaw, so have may others. Several people have made very valid points on why cloak is flawed.

You accuse me of ignorance, but you fail to demonstrate grounds for this accusation beyond unfounded claims.

The case has been argued that the cloak is the counter for local. One key detail is the lack of resolution for pilots where both sides perform without error.
This is not an opinion. The very existence of this thread is not centered around kill mails being too easy for cloaked ships, but around the fact that PvE ships are able to avoid them, and in so doing feel oppressed by their continued presence.
They are calling it denial of play, they refer to it as griefing, they are frustrated.

They do NOT expect to fight back against the cloaked ships, in these complaints, with the PvE ships.

That is a staggering disparity in perspective. That would be one of the keystones of why the two sides in this debate do not agree.

The ones seeking to limit cloaks, do NOT feel that the PvE ships should ever need to encounter direct PvP combat.
They should not need to fit for this...
they should not need to bring friends...
they expect to be able to get safe, and have the cloaked ship accept it's failure to catch them, following which the cloaked ship should simply LEAVE.
They seem to want no part of this mind game, where they must guess whether it is safe to come out, or simply assume the cloaked ship is always active.

The concept that the cloaked ship has no chance of catching them, unless they make a significant error first, is expected as the normal state of affairs.
Certainly a convenient status quo, by many standards, but who are they to question that detail?
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#419 - 2015-01-20 21:47:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:


Scout.


Shows up in local, everything scatters

Bullet Therapist wrote:

Most don't fit them, those that do often offline them. Other ships don't.


If they don't have a POS they fit them.
Bullet Therapist wrote:

Other than staging and jump bridges most POSes have no or few guns.


Not only does just about every POS come armed but ratting POS also tend to sport bubbles around them. You never warp blind to a POS.
Bullet Therapist wrote:

Bring more than one interceptor and shotgun the sites players are most likely to be in, it's not like all anomalies are created equally.


Still takes far longer to get to an anom than for the ishtar to warp off.


Yeah, that's the point of scouting batlec, to get information where there going before you show up with your main fleet, which doesn't have to come 20 seconds later. You could pick a time like, two days later or two hours later.

And no, again, most isktars do not fit a cloaking device, those that do leave them offline.

Also no, again they're not usually armed or bubbled, and if they were that would just decrease the number of warp in vectors available to warp to it. Which helps you as an aggressor.

Also, a 100mn AB fit isktar has a 29.7 second align time with perfect skills, and a 10 second afterburner cycle. You can land on grid in a purpose build interceptor in about 5 seconds, so yes, actually it's very easy to catch isktars. And before you say something about a purpose built interceptor, you're the one that flies a megathron around with harpies.

You tell everyone about your harpy and co megathron, yet you can't catch a ratter without using afk cloaking because it's too hard? Stop lying baltec. The stretches you make to try to prove your point sometimes are pathetic, and this is as bad as anything I've ever seen you write. You never 'rubbish' anyone's arguments, either you straight up lie, or your try to misdirect the argument to something that at best is only mildly relevant., particularly if anyone mentions anything that could make a PVE oriented player safer to even the smallest degree- even only if it's a side effect.

I don't expect that you'll do anything else in the future, as you seem to have one of those personalities that just waits for other people to stop talking. But to anyone else reading this, look at some of baltecs other posts. See how quickly he is to try to derail an argument, or say that something that is *easily* (like catching a ratter Roll) possible isn't or take or some other nonsense.


Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#420 - 2015-01-20 21:49:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Doddy wrote:
AFK cloaking is no different to being afk in station or afk in a pos. Keep them all as they are or nerf them all.

Cloaking in general is a counter to local, keep them both as they are or nerf them both.

Nerf Afk cloaking specifically or cloaking in general without nerfing these other things and it will just kill the game even more.


This is false in every sense. POS can be destroyed. A station can change hands, reinforced or taken. Though you cant eject the player, you always know where they are, and if they undock you know exactly where they will be.

None of these are true with a "AFK cloaker". As I said a few posts ago. They can stay cloaked safely in a system with minimal effort till the EVE servers are closed.



A station cannot change hands or lock people out. And AFK player in a station is exactly the same as an AFK cloaker.


No baltec, stop this nonsense. A person sitting in a station does not have the available degree of intelligence or the opportunity for attack that a cloaked player has. This is a lie and an attempt to derail the conversation. Stop it.