Player Features and Ideas Discussion

only thing being , your ideas keep getting worse.

The reason I told how things are done in wormholes, was to show that birth l both places have their own ways of securing their PVE-activities, but that there should still be risk. It's not that wormholes are safer or seem safer than sov null. We just accept the risk of getting blown up even if we do everything right. After a while you just assume you are getting ganked and act , not expect perfect safety.

What you want is to make the small risk in sov-null even smaller. In eve, the implied risk is there the moment you undock. Act . There are plenty of ways to make the chance smaller.

What you find to be seems to correspond with living in highsec combined with the Intel and early warnings you get from sov-null

As someone who lives in wormholes and does PVE there, the rats don't decrease risk. You still min/max your fit and its just as different to apvp-fit as they are in K-space. Sleepers are less forgiving if you make a mistake. You are still more likely to get jumped when there are as few rats as possible on field

No, the problem is you move the goal posts and yet maintain your overall position, that is not discussion or learning, it is simply a form of confirmation bias. For example, SurrenderMonkey's statistics on WH ratting activity. Clearly it shows a more dangerous environment. You misinterpreted it saying it proved Mike's point. Then when it was pointed out you have misinterpreted the statistics you moved the goal post by waving the data away as flawed. In short.

• SurrenderMonkey's data was fine when you thought it helped.
• SurrenderMonkey's data is flawed when in fact it cuts against you.

When data goes against your premise....you rethink the premise. You do NOT rethink the data or the summary statistics.

Or even more simply, you are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your own data. The data ARE the facts.

The trouble with Jerghul's argument, is his false belief that the repeated line regarding implicit threats, is some sort of golden bullet that wins all. The joke is Eve is built on implicit threats, you face them whether docked or not. It's the core of the game, as Eve is PvP centric.

Plus whether he knows it or not, he's actually proving us right. But his logic train is so out of kilter, he cannot see the wood for the trees.

He seems now to be basing his logic on the Fozzie statement and in doing so he implies what he thinks Fozzie meant with his words. His interpretation of the sentence is that this cherry picked part "But we understand it has a pretty big psychological effect. We would like to make some changes", is actually all about implicit threats and also means the devs think implicit threats need to be changed.

So let's focus on this statement and makes some observations.
So we can see from this first part, they are happy with pilots AFKing with cloaks and that they are not worried about cloaked ships being OP.
It is in fact a good thing that pilots can attempt to disrupt money making this way, in null.

Then we have the following.
He talks about how they are aware it's a big effect psychologically, then talks of changes, but not what many will expect. Then uses WH space as a for instance.

Now at this point, Jerghul would have us dismiss data that goes against his ideas. But let's try fact finding what was meant here.
Why is it that AFKing doesn't work in WH space?

1. Rats? Hardly. Sure they are meaner in WH space and we know CCP are introducing their AI wider into the game. But they don't stop AFKing in wormholes, so we can discount this.


2. Gates, or lack thereof? Well seeing as they are only used to enter a system, just as WH are to enter that space and not to actually AFK there, it can't really be that. Sure some corps spend a lot of time closing WH's, but they cannot be there 23.5/7, so we can discount this.


3. Now he says WH space, so he doesn't mean a specific bonus that one type of WH may give and these bonuses don't stop AFKing. So it's something they all share, that NS doesn't.


4. Implants and lack of clones? How can they be related? Well those that chose to live in WH space, do so knowing that when podded, they end back in empire. They fit their clone accordingly, then return. How does this stop AFKing there? Well it doesn't. To suggest it does is quite frankly, ludicrous.


5. Lack of cynos? Well as has already been mentioned by those who live there, being dropped in WH space is just as likely, they just don't using the same mechanics. So no real difference there,


6. See 9.


7. Ship limitations? Well yes this is a thing, but how does this stop AFKing in WH space? Well it cannot. Any covert ship can and do enter WH space often, they are a known entity. Known and accepted.


8. Acceptance of the spaces limitations? Could this be why AFKing isn't an issue in WH space? Why would it be? Those that live there do so knowing that life is and will be hard. As stated before, this is known and accepted. It's also not a stick you can beat them with and retain any credibility.


9. Local? Well WH space's local is different and they all have that effect. You AFK in a WH system, who's going to know you are there? They already accept you could be, so not seeing you in local makes no difference. There is no psychological effect from going AFK in a WH.
In null however, just how does someone cloaked and AFK, interact with those in the system? Well through local of course.

So even though Jerghul did some amazing mental gymnastics, in order to try to dismiss local as being the reason, it's quite obviously is. Even those who were part of the interview, came to the same conclusion. But we are still waiting to see what these changes may be
But can we simply remove local and call it a day? Well no I don't think we can. Because Null being different, requires a little more info than WH space. So we could see a module that replaces that function. But I have a feeling WH denizens, will request for it to not work there.

If I want to make some ship explode and I can catch it, it will die, no matter if it's omni-tanked, plex-tanked, honor-tanked or officer-tanked. Same if I'm doing PVE, I don't think about how the fact that I don't have a resist-hole will save me. I'm equally worried about losing my ship is it omni-tanked or not.

As much as you try to make it sound like there are mechanics that make wormholes seem less dangerous, the truth is, they are far more dangerous than any sov-null. It's all about the mindset of the pilots, not the mechanics of the area you are in.

Would I like to make PVE harder in K-space too? Sure, but the tears would fill an ocean.

Maybe something should be brought attention to this thread. Just a thought here.

But what is the real issue of "AFK cloaking." Then the question becomes. Are they game issues or personal issues? From my short experience of what I can see. Cloaking has a pretty hard counter we call local intelligence system. Or is Cloaking the hard counter to local intelligence system? I really can't tell *squints*.

Anyways. I didn't really read through all 221 pages worth of repeated arguments. (I kinda skimmed the first and last ten pages and noticed a common pattern to the arguments, so I'm going to assume that the arguments haven't changed between those first and last ten pages.)

We have point A: Cloaking is balanced by local, thus it completes it function and so it requires no change. Why fix something that not broken right? Right? Well lets poke some holes in point A (Don't worry I will poke holes in point B C and D as well) Just because something is balance. And from my short time here, I'm pretty sure is very ******* balance, doesn't mean it a /good/ balance. Cloaking ships can't hurt you for immunity to being hurt, short of non-targetting items. IE smart bombs(Why are they called smart bombs anyways? Pretty sure they arn't very smart.) Or getting to close to something or someone. So this straight up means that a cloaked ship can in no way interact with anyone or really anything (Short of local intelligence system) without showing themselves to everyone on grid with them. However CCP has shown that they are taking steps to remove the ability to straight up stop interaction with everything around them, or be interacted with. Look at the new stations they are making. I mean holy ****! LOOK AT THE SIZE OF THOSE THINGS! What this means is that the argument of station docking is basically the same concept is starting to become less and less true as CCP gears closer and closer to making everything construct-able and destructible by eggers. So new methiods for both sides may need to be developed for these purposes.

Point B: IT MY SPACE AND I SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO HUNT DOWN ANYONE IN SPACE. NO ONE SHOULD BE IMMUNE. While this argument is to a point valid. (A tad immature, but valid) I just would like to point out one small problem. Cloaking ships arn't immune to attack. I know this must be a tired argument. But as soon as the cloaking ship attempts to attack you, they in turn open themselves up to attack. So assuming cloaking ships are immune to attack is by definition false. All the cloak allows them to do, is at a heavy price, be able to pick who they wish to kill a lot easier. (And this price is great, like can only target very narrow set of targets price.)

Point C: "Cloaking is a bad mechanic, and should just out right be removed." Counter arguement "And local is a bad mechanic as well, and it to should be remove. why not remove them both together?"

How do they perform this psychological impact? Why are players affected by it? Why is it so effective?

Funny somebody points out the huge flaw in Jerghul's methodology, and he ignores it.

implicit threat: I had to look that word up, and I feel that it being used in such a way that it makes it seem more then what it really is. Implied threat is also a good word. How about Absolute threat. These things all mean the same thing, however I don't feel that they apply to cloaking vessels. A thesauri does not help arguments. Information however does, Through my own research. I have discovered that this "issue" Has existed at the very least back to year 2010, that is almost going on six years now that this "issue" has been brought up, of the few ones I've looked at from back then, the information seems to not have changed much.

The line of this information is simple CCP has far more numbers and stats to look at then you or me, however I personally can't seem to find anyplace where CCP has clearly shown their own statistics on the matter, this results in a void of information when attempting to argue for, or against an idea to change cloaking, this results in most information numbers, stats and so forth thrown out there tend to be inconclusive, or simple put. Made up. you also find for every thread/site/topic that was brought up, there is roughly an equal number of supports as there were opposer.

As for making up jargon. Please do not do this, as a computer technician who is doing their best to attempt to get into the game producing field. I find such attempts to be... How should I put it? Annoying? Aggravating?

Next on my subject. You seem to have this fascination with redirecting subjects when it does not favor your argument. While I'm not here to argue, I am going to point out flaws in your reasoning. How would rats have any reasonable effect on a cloaked player, let alone a AFK cloaked player?

Don't answer that question, because the answer would be none. Just like players, Rats can not target, or in anyway interact with a cloaked player as long as that cloaked player is in no way decloaked, and thus target-able.

Then lets bring up another thing. almost 90% of the mechanics found in wormholes is also found in known space, the extreme exception of this, is one, wormholes tend to have these fancy effects, however the effects are not known to actively decloak, or provide cloaking any bonuses. The second thing that are not found in wormholes that is found in known space, is Local.

As for omni-rats. Omni-rats are also found in known space as well. Incursions are where you will find them, and I'm sure you will find plenty of cloakers looking for a juicy killmail in certain incursion sites.

This is a great opportunity to bring up how I, that right, How I, me the person, think both sides are wrong. Simple put, from my perspective both sides are looking at the wrong angle of things. Why are both sides so perfectly balanced in in the last 5+ years. Little to nothing has changed?

Let me answer that for you. Information is the key why it never changes. Of all the things that happen and is still happening in eve online to this day, How information is process, how it obtained, and how it transmitted.

There is no way to break into other channels without making alts and earning their trust so you can spy. There no way to disrupt the flow of information without blowing your cover as a spy and thus removed as an element. And there is no way to provide truly false information to different channels in Eve online. Eve online has one perfect, infallible, unbreaking power in the game that everyone potentially has at their finger tips. The ability to create secure(Password protect) channels that can't be broken into by an outside force. Ontop of that, provides a near instant transmission of information to everyone in the channel.

Now if only there was a way to tie channels to player own structures. The ability that if broken into those structures, you could perform a number of... Things to those communication arrays.... and the further away you are from those information structures, the longer it takes for you to receive or give information.

If only.