These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4481 - 2015-12-13 20:04:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
Teckos Pech wrote:
Okay, so you are not going to define risk, implicit or otherwise...so it can mean whatever you want it to mean, essentially rubbish.


It can technically mean anything the developers want it to mean.

Its enough to know that the devs think there are good reasons for why afk cloaky camping is no problem in wormhole space, and that the implicit threat/big psychological effect from afk cloaky camping is something they are looking into.

All I am doing is looking at good reasons (I call them mechanisms) and seeing what they look like if mirrored in null-sec.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4482 - 2015-12-13 20:04:30 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

NS has no protections against hostiles but those you create for yourself. That the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks is unfortunate.

The ratters in wormholes aren't braver or anything. They have better support.


I find these particularly interesting. No protection but those you create for yourself ... AGREED!

Now, on to "the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks" ... which ones did you have in mind? Which protection is rendered irrelevant? Because you're almost there; you're so close to the truth you can smell it.

When you say "They have better support", I assume you are referring to people actively guarding the entrances? Maybe some falcons and logistics on standby? I won't put words in your mouth; I have been waiting a long time for you to finally answer your own question -- come on, you can do it.

They have better support...
...because there is no protection but that which you create for yourself...
...and this kind of protection is rendered irrelevant in nullsec because...?

Because???

Tell us why, Mike? Why does the cloaky camper in NS defeat the support fleet whereas the same support works wonders in WH?

Or ..... or perhaps ..... would a support fleet in NS maybe .....? Would it? Finish that thought Mike. Finish it.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4483 - 2015-12-13 21:05:33 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Okay, so you are not going to define risk, implicit or otherwise...so it can mean whatever you want it to mean, essentially rubbish.


It can technically mean anything the developers want it to mean.

Its enough to know that the devs think there are good reasons for why afk cloaky camping is no problem in wormhole space, and that the implicit threat/big psychological effect from afk cloaky camping is something they are looking into.

All I am doing is looking at good reasons (I call them mechanisms) and seeing what they look like if mirrored in null-sec.


If it can mean anything, then it means nothing. So now you are left, literally, with nothing.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4484 - 2015-12-13 21:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
Technically, you mean the developers have no reason for looking into the big psychological effect they think they have identified, but have not bothered to define for us.

I will just continue to look into the reasons for why afk cloaky camping is not a problem in wormhole space under the assumption that Fozie knows what he is talking about.

Feel free to contribute if you like. Or not. It is entirely up to you.

Right now I am looking for feedback on "natural phenomena", or unique ecosystems.

Edit
Quote:
CCP Fozie wrote:
It's very important that it be possible to disrupt peoples' money-making in nullsec, and AFK cloaking is one of the most effective ways. We're not worried about cloaked ships being overpowered because cloaked ships do very little DPS.

But we understand it has a pretty big psychological effect. We would like to make some changes...it may not be the changes people are expecting, though. For instance, I can tell you that AFK cloaking is not an issue in wormhole space and there are pretty good reasons for that

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Mag's
Azn Empire
#4485 - 2015-12-13 23:02:33 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
If it can mean anything, then it means nothing. So now you are left, literally, with nothing.
You're wasting your time Teckos. Best ignore him.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4486 - 2015-12-13 23:05:03 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
If it can mean anything, then it means nothing. So now you are left, literally, with nothing.
You're wasting your time Teckos. Best ignore him.


Yup. Just going to be constant goal post moving.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#4487 - 2015-12-13 23:07:09 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Technically, you mean the developers have no reason for looking into the big psychological effect they think they have identified, but have not bothered to define for us.




You understand that where he said "We understand it has a pretty big psychological effect," that he didn't, in any way, describe that as a bad thing.

That's an entirely fictitious invention all your own. You are literally making things up.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Mag's
Azn Empire
#4488 - 2015-12-13 23:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
If it can mean anything, then it means nothing. So now you are left, literally, with nothing.
You're wasting your time Teckos. Best ignore him.


Yup. Just going to be constant goal post moving.
That and just flat out lying. He's very quick to tell us things the DEVs know or believe, but not so quick to show us when or where they said it. When he does have a statement to show, he'll tell us what that DEV actually meant and expect us to take his word as gospel. Then go through a lot of mental gymnastics and come up with in his own words, logic that is "not completely linear".

Then when you point out in detail where he went wrong, he'll ignore the post. But still want discussion, apparently. Lol

He's trolling bud. No one can be that ignorant.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4489 - 2015-12-13 23:37:48 UTC
Mag's wrote:

He's trolling bud. No one can be that ignorant.


Oh, plenty of carebears are that ignorant, in fact.

It's the circuitous back and forth, and the repeating of his debunked concepts that makes him a troll.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#4490 - 2015-12-14 03:46:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

NS has no protections against hostiles but those you create for yourself. That the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks is unfortunate.

The ratters in wormholes aren't braver or anything. They have better support.


I find these particularly interesting. No protection but those you create for yourself ... AGREED!

Now, on to "the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks" ... which ones did you have in mind? Which protection is rendered irrelevant? Because you're almost there; you're so close to the truth you can smell it.

When you say "They have better support", I assume you are referring to people actively guarding the entrances? Maybe some falcons and logistics on standby? I won't put words in your mouth; I have been waiting a long time for you to finally answer your own question -- come on, you can do it.

They have better support...
...because there is no protection but that which you create for yourself...
...and this kind of protection is rendered irrelevant in nullsec because...?

Because???

Tell us why, Mike? Why does the cloaky camper in NS defeat the support fleet whereas the same support works wonders in WH?

Or ..... or perhaps ..... would a support fleet in NS maybe .....? Would it? Finish that thought Mike. Finish it.


Because of scale.

A wormhole is a single system. NS works over a much wider area. The equivalent defenses in a wormhole are spread over a great many systems in NS. In the wormhole the people defending the system are right there, in the system. They aren't staging or 5 jumps out.

And then there is the profit floor. Wormholes make enough ISK to warrant the fleet being present for the operation. Yes, it's a different mechanic, you have to get the goods out, etc... but it's a pretty big difference for time spent in reletively similar safety- no one is right there shooting you in that second, you must be completely safe.

...and because when the attack comes in a wormhole it has to come in person. They don't send a single cheap cloaked ship and open the cyno right under you, they have to come through the wormhole which is watched, bubbled, and potentially camped so the fight starts right there at the defense.

The closed nature of the wormhole allows for the building of a defense that isn't possible in NS. Logoffs and new wormhole entrances are dangers in Null too, but the scale changes everything about how they are dealt with.

The cloaks aren't balanced in wormholes either, but the 'remote' location and lack of cyno adds a layer of defense that NS can't match. The fact that wormholes are so much more deadly (though some of that is the rats themselves) despite that advantage just points to how disastrous removing local would be in the more easily accessed areas of space.

NS is about building Empires. In actual empire space there is concord. NS does the same job with defense fleets, except the cloaked camping ships make those defenses irrelevant as they can teleport an enemy fleet anywhere. It's better now, I assume since I have not been there in years, but the mechanic itself is still op just the same. You should not be 100% safe while still in a position to threaten or force reactions from other players. It's not that it's not a problem in other areas of space, it's just that there are other, bigger, problems there.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4491 - 2015-12-14 05:44:48 UTC
I always assumed - but I'll be honest, I'm no ratter - the ratting fleet WAS the defense fleet. Just a bunch of PvP ships doing sites because why the hell not...? The way you explained it, however, I see the problem: it's the force projection that bugs you.

Even if you were ratting in a system where some die-hard PvPers had set up a gatecamp, your defenses would be spread out across multiple systems whereas the attacker can focus all his power in one spot?

It's obviously highly situational (some guys drop a handful of bombers, some drop Stratiosses and recons, while others still will drop Aeons), so I suppose your backup may or may not be sufficient ... and since they're doing the planning, one should assume they'll drop enough for whatever you've got on field ... or not drop at all and wait for a better opportunity?

Now, the kind of ships we (The Wraithguard) fly are nimble enough to get away (some would say we're kitefags, some call us wannabe-l33t-blobbers ... some say 'nicely done and where do I sign up?' LOL). Anyway -- our ships can easily make it out before anyone gets hard tackled. That said, I can see why a ratting battleship would not.

EvE being a sandbox, I can also see why you really wanted to bring your battleship and now you can't because there's this one guy cloaky camping your system since like forever.

Whenever we strongly suspect there may be a cyno involved, kiting and ECM has served us well. But yeah ..... I see your point there. It's not because "we" don't have the same issues with it, that the issue isn't there.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4492 - 2015-12-14 06:05:17 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
It's not because "we" don't have the same issues with it, that the issue isn't there.


I disagree.

That does mean the "issue" isn't there. If something is a problem for one person and not a problem for the other, it means the first person is doing it wrong, plain and simple.

He can use as many excuses as he wants for playing the game wrong, but in the end he is just asking to have his uncertainty taken away so he can lazily farm afk in his isk/hr min/maxed boats. He doesn't want to defend himself like your group does, he thinks he's entitled to not have to defend himself in the first place.

You are better than he is. He is worse than you are. You put in more effort than he does. He puts in much less effort than you do.

And he thinks there should be no difference in the outcome.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4493 - 2015-12-14 06:28:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
I always assumed - but I'll be honest, I'm no ratter - the ratting fleet WAS the defense fleet. Just a bunch of PvP ships doing sites because why the hell not...? The way you explained it, however, I see the problem: it's the force projection that bugs you.

Even if you were ratting in a system where some die-hard PvPers had set up a gatecamp, your defenses would be spread out across multiple systems whereas the attacker can focus all his power in one spot?

It's obviously highly situational (some guys drop a handful of bombers, some drop Stratiosses and recons, while others still will drop Aeons), so I suppose your backup may or may not be sufficient ... and since they're doing the planning, one should assume they'll drop enough for whatever you've got on field ... or not drop at all and wait for a better opportunity?

Now, the kind of ships we (The Wraithguard) fly are nimble enough to get away (some would say we're kitefags, some call us wannabe-l33t-blobbers ... some say 'nicely done and where do I sign up?' LOL). Anyway -- our ships can easily make it out before anyone gets hard tackled. That said, I can see why a ratting battleship would not.

EvE being a sandbox, I can also see why you really wanted to bring your battleship and now you can't because there's this one guy cloaky camping your system since like forever.

Whenever we strongly suspect there may be a cyno involved, kiting and ECM has served us well. But yeah ..... I see your point there. It's not because "we" don't have the same issues with it, that the issue isn't there.


BLOPSing is not like it used to be given fatigue. Yes, a BLOPS bridge range is 8 light years with max skills, but you got maybe 2-4 jumps and then you are done for the night...and given the exponential nature of fatigue maybe the next night as well. The continued view of the cyno as the primary hobgoblin underscores the point that has been raised before many times, "Just one more nerf and things will be balanced...." The biggest danger these days are roaming cloaking ships like the stratios. And Gate camps are usually at choke points, not every system has to be camped.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4494 - 2015-12-14 06:53:48 UTC
Let us also keep in mind that with WHs according to the w-spacers, you can get rage rolled which by the sounds of it as bringing lots of force suddenly and often with little or no warning.

In NS you'll due to local intel channels are a Thing™ and can provide substantial warning to a large group moving through your area. Especially if you are blue to your neighbors and share intel (e.g. a coaltion).

We have already seen some summary statistics suggesting that w-space is actually more dangerous...not less dangerous which is counter to what Mike is imply with his scale argument. Having say, 300 pilots living in a single WH should be safer than 1200 guys spread out over 10-20 systems.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#4495 - 2015-12-14 08:59:04 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

NS has no protections against hostiles but those you create for yourself. That the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks is unfortunate.

The ratters in wormholes aren't braver or anything. They have better support.


I find these particularly interesting. No protection but those you create for yourself ... AGREED!

Now, on to "the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks" ... which ones did you have in mind? Which protection is rendered irrelevant? Because you're almost there; you're so close to the truth you can smell it.

When you say "They have better support", I assume you are referring to people actively guarding the entrances? Maybe some falcons and logistics on standby? I won't put words in your mouth; I have been waiting a long time for you to finally answer your own question -- come on, you can do it.

They have better support...
...because there is no protection but that which you create for yourself...
...and this kind of protection is rendered irrelevant in nullsec because...?

Because???

Tell us why, Mike? Why does the cloaky camper in NS defeat the support fleet whereas the same support works wonders in WH?

Or ..... or perhaps ..... would a support fleet in NS maybe .....? Would it? Finish that thought Mike. Finish it.


Because of scale.

A wormhole is a single system. NS works over a much wider area. The equivalent defenses in a wormhole are spread over a great many systems in NS. In the wormhole the people defending the system are right there, in the system. They aren't staging or 5 jumps out.

And then there is the profit floor. Wormholes make enough ISK to warrant the fleet being present for the operation. Yes, it's a different mechanic, you have to get the goods out, etc... but it's a pretty big difference for time spent in reletively similar safety- no one is right there shooting you in that second, you must be completely safe.

...and because when the attack comes in a wormhole it has to come in person. They don't send a single cheap cloaked ship and open the cyno right under you, they have to come through the wormhole which is watched, bubbled, and potentially camped so the fight starts right there at the defense.

The closed nature of the wormhole allows for the building of a defense that isn't possible in NS. Logoffs and new wormhole entrances are dangers in Null too, but the scale changes everything about how they are dealt with.

The cloaks aren't balanced in wormholes either, but the 'remote' location and lack of cyno adds a layer of defense that NS can't match. The fact that wormholes are so much more deadly (though some of that is the rats themselves) despite that advantage just points to how disastrous removing local would be in the more easily accessed areas of space.

NS is about building Empires. In actual empire space there is concord. NS does the same job with defense fleets, except the cloaked camping ships make those defenses irrelevant as they can teleport an enemy fleet anywhere. It's better now, I assume since I have not been there in years, but the mechanic itself is still op just the same. You should not be 100% safe while still in a position to threaten or force reactions from other players. It's not that it's not a problem in other areas of space, it's just that there are other, bigger, problems there.


You are making assumptions again

When talking about doing PVE in wormholes, you cannot always close all the entries to a system. If it's your home and you are doing capital escalations, then yes you can keep it pretty clear, but those sites run out fast. I know I've burned down the chain 5-10 jumps to help a guy who got caught on a site.

Profits: If all you care is your wallet, you do sites either alone or with as few people as possible, since the PVE-payouts are still the same as they are everywhere in eve, so it does not promote group-play. Having multiple people to do it makes it easier and faster, but it also drops the isk you can make. Also, we don't have unlimited number of sites in a system. They will run out pretty fast and you'll have to find a new wormhole to get more isk, which increases the chances of getting caught.

K162=Cyno: The first tackle is usually done with a single cheap ship to keep you there for the 5-15 seconds until the fleet lands. You can thank the local nullsec CSM for nerfing the spawning-rate of nullsec-bound wormholes, which means you are safer from sudden fleets coming from there. In W-space, those unwelcome K162's spawn alot more often. It's not very nice feeling sitting in a site with 2,5 minutes left on your siege when the scout says they have a new signature. Even less fun when they call it's a wormhole and if they say there's a t3-fleet dropping through it, you know you are pretty much dead.

While the mechanics are different and the landscape is smaller and W-space has less people living in them, you can for sure make comparisons between the 2. We both have ways to defend against surprising threats. In W-space those threats are usually more in the style of "SURPRISE, you lost your ship" when in null it's more about how lazy the guy doing the PVE is. The only real way you can get caught without knowing it would happen is with the cyno.

Why is it that people want to nerf the cloak, even though it's not the cloak they are afraid of. It's the cyno that is the big boogey-man for you. Why aren't you nerfing that?

Wormholer for life.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#4496 - 2015-12-14 09:20:42 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Quote:

Premise
Afk cloaky camping is not a problem. Implicit threat/quite a big psychological effect derived from afk cloaky camping is something the developers are looking at. Implicit threat/quite a big psychological effect derived from afk cloaky camping is not a problem in wormhole space. There are good reasons for that.

Argument
The good reasons for why implicit threat/quite a big psychological effect from afk cloaky camping are mechanical.

Goal
Find the mechanical good wormhole reasons and apply them to null-sec to see what they look like there.

1/8 Wormhole style rats reduces the implicit threat/quite a big psychological effect stemming from afk cloaky camping.
2/8 Closing/opening gates reduces implicit threat/quite a big psychological effect. stemming from afk cloaky camping
3/8 Natural phenomena

3/8 Wormhole space has system effects that impact significantly on doctrine and tactical efficiency. This allows residents of specific systems to fine tune doctrine, skills, and tactics optimally adapted to their specific ecosystem. Visitors to that system must either fight at a serious disadvantage, or enter with a high degree of planned premeditation.

Giving sov holders access to infrastructure modules that allows them to tailor combat environments in systems they control duplicates that effect and could be combined with expanding wormhole star effects to more types of stars (in weaker or different incarnations).

Implicit threat is reduced by giving visitors the option of either fighting at a disadvantage, or by preparing sufficiently. In effect reducing the level of opportunistic predation a PvE player need worry about.


Morrigan
I am systematically going through the points. Comments like "you are wrong, that is stupid, you are a troll" are not really constructive and merely serve to fill up the thread with chaff. Consider using phrasing like "I disagree because" or similar.



Like this?

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
You mean like people did here or here or here?

Omni rats would do nothing, for reasons given. That is not why PvP and maxed PvE fits are so different. Eve 101

Shutting gates would break the game. This should require no explanation.

Wormhole effects are no big deal and have NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on PvP "threat". But you'd know this if you lived there.


You see, you've been told time and again why you're wrong. But you don't care, you keep posting the same diatribe seemingly in the hope that if you say it enough, eventually it'll stick.


Edit: I predict though that, as usual, you'll ignore all the salient points. Then probably post your list again and crack on as if no-one disagreed or asking people what the think as if the wave of negative (and accurate) feedback didn't happen.




Far as I'm concerned, I called it.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
I predict though that, as usual, you'll ignore all the salient points. Then probably post your list again and crack on as if no-one disagreed or asking people what the think as if the wave of negative (and accurate) feedback didn't happen.


Ignore detailed posts explaining why you're wrong: Check
Post your list again regardless: Check
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#4497 - 2015-12-14 09:24:34 UTC
@Wander Prian: Let the WH side go, you'd be better off discussing quantum physics with a shrub at this point.

Let's find out why people in lowsec don't have issues with this.

The mental gymnastics will be stunning.


So, let's have it - why are lowsec people still PvEing in carriers with known hostiles in system? Explain what "mechanics" exist that mean they feel able to PvE in capitals WITH a known threat (not even a neut, a full on known hotdropper) yet nullbears will scurry away at there mere whiff of a neut in local.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#4498 - 2015-12-14 10:12:37 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
@Wander Prian: Let the WH side go, you'd be better off discussing quantum physics with a shrub at this point.

Let's find out why people in lowsec don't have issues with this.

The mental gymnastics will be stunning.


So, let's have it - why are lowsec people still PvEing in carriers with known hostiles in system? Explain what "mechanics" exist that mean they feel able to PvE in capitals WITH a known threat (not even a neut, a full on known hotdropper) yet nullbears will scurry away at there mere whiff of a neut in local.
I'll reply later with my lowsec experiences, when I get home.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Maria Dragoon
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4499 - 2015-12-14 11:08:53 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

NS has no protections against hostiles but those you create for yourself. That the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks is unfortunate.

The ratters in wormholes aren't braver or anything. They have better support.


I find these particularly interesting. No protection but those you create for yourself ... AGREED!

Now, on to "the majority of those measures are rendered irrelevant by cloaks" ... which ones did you have in mind? Which protection is rendered irrelevant? Because you're almost there; you're so close to the truth you can smell it.

When you say "They have better support", I assume you are referring to people actively guarding the entrances? Maybe some falcons and logistics on standby? I won't put words in your mouth; I have been waiting a long time for you to finally answer your own question -- come on, you can do it.

They have better support...
...because there is no protection but that which you create for yourself...
...and this kind of protection is rendered irrelevant in nullsec because...?

Because???

Tell us why, Mike? Why does the cloaky camper in NS defeat the support fleet whereas the same support works wonders in WH?

Or ..... or perhaps ..... would a support fleet in NS maybe .....? Would it? Finish that thought Mike. Finish it.


Because of scale.

A wormhole is a single system. NS works over a much wider area. The equivalent defenses in a wormhole are spread over a great many systems in NS. In the wormhole the people defending the system are right there, in the system. They aren't staging or 5 jumps out.

And then there is the profit floor. Wormholes make enough ISK to warrant the fleet being present for the operation. Yes, it's a different mechanic, you have to get the goods out, etc... but it's a pretty big difference for time spent in reletively similar safety- no one is right there shooting you in that second, you must be completely safe.

...and because when the attack comes in a wormhole it has to come in person. They don't send a single cheap cloaked ship and open the cyno right under you, they have to come through the wormhole which is watched, bubbled, and potentially camped so the fight starts right there at the defense.

The closed nature of the wormhole allows for the building of a defense that isn't possible in NS. Logoffs and new wormhole entrances are dangers in Null too, but the scale changes everything about how they are dealt with.

The cloaks aren't balanced in wormholes either, but the 'remote' location and lack of cyno adds a layer of defense that NS can't match. The fact that wormholes are so much more deadly (though some of that is the rats themselves) despite that advantage just points to how disastrous removing local would be in the more easily accessed areas of space.

NS is about building Empires. In actual empire space there is concord. NS does the same job with defense fleets, except the cloaked camping ships make those defenses irrelevant as they can teleport an enemy fleet anywhere. It's better now, I assume since I have not been there in years, but the mechanic itself is still op just the same. You should not be 100% safe while still in a position to threaten or force reactions from other players. It's not that it's not a problem in other areas of space, it's just that there are other, bigger, problems there.


You are making assumptions again

When talking about doing PVE in wormholes, you cannot always close all the entries to a system. If it's your home and you are doing capital escalations, then yes you can keep it pretty clear, but those sites run out fast. I know I've burned down the chain 5-10 jumps to help a guy who got caught on a site.

Profits: If all you care is your wallet, you do sites either alone or with as few people as possible, since the PVE-payouts are still the same as they are everywhere in eve, so it does not promote group-play. Having multiple people to do it makes it easier and faster, but it also drops the isk you can make. Also, we don't have unlimited number of sites in a system. They will run out pretty fast and you'll have to find a new wormhole to get more isk, which increases the chances of getting caught.

K162=Cyno: The first tackle is usually done with a single cheap ship to keep you there for the 5-15 seconds until the fleet lands. You can thank the local nullsec CSM for nerfing the spawning-rate of nullsec-bound wormholes, which means you are safer from sudden fleets coming from there. In W-space, those unwelcome K162's spawn alot more often. It's not very nice feeling sitting in a site with 2,5 minutes left on your siege when the scout says they have a new signature. Even less fun when they call it's a wormhole and if they say there's a t3-fleet dropping through it, you know you are pretty much dead.

While the mechanics are different and the landscape is smaller and W-space has less people living in them, you can for sure make comparisons between the 2. We both have ways to defend against surprising threats. In W-space those threats are usually more in the style of "SURPRISE, you lost your ship" when in null it's more about how lazy the guy doing the PVE is. The only real way you can get caught without knowing it would happen is with the cyno.

Why is it that people want to nerf the cloak, even though it's not the cloak they are afraid of. It's the cyno that is the big boogey-man for you. Why aren't you nerfing that?



We need more "SURPRISE, you warped to cloning." moments, not less of them.

Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. Confucius

"A man who talks to people who aren't real is crazy. A man who talks to people who aren't real and writes down what they say is an author."
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4500 - 2015-12-14 11:47:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Jerghul wrote:
Technically, you mean the developers have no reason for looking into the big psychological effect they think they have identified, but have not bothered to define for us.




You understand that where he said "We understand it has a pretty big psychological effect," that he didn't, in any way, describe that as a bad thing.

That's an entirely fictitious invention all your own. You are literally making things up.


My goodness. I am not the one projecting normative moralism into this thread. You guys are. "EvE should be this, Eve should be that, Jerghul is such a meanie, I am going to tell on that meanie, Carbears suck, wormholers are soooo hipster..." (I am paraphrasing sentiment, not quoting verbatim).

I pity my kids. The living hell grammar school must be.

Good, bad who cares? The Devs have identified a big psychological effect they are going to mitigate with mechanisms that work in wormhole space. There is no other way to read fozie's post.

Morrigan
We have discussed most of the salient points in the first link you know. But I am not adverse to rehashing them if you insist. Surrender monkey proving that IF rats are harder, Then fewer of them die seems to me to be non-salient (it would just lead to discussion of ship deaths per hour of ratting anyway. We know wormhole ratting is far more lucrative than null-sec ratting...so where do you think that sidetrack will end up taking us?). Mags point I discussed in length and made that argument that too much implicit threat causes people to play other games in their Steam Library, and that reducing implicit threat (or big psychological effect) will often increase real and explicit threat.

So yah, these things have been discussed.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1