These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#541 - 2015-01-23 16:05:30 UTC
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor. A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player.

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
#542 - 2015-01-23 16:47:56 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor. A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player.

You are crossing a line, with this logic.

By expressing a desire to have the ability to affect cloaked characters, it begs the question of adding in the means to access any character not normally available to interact with.

Let's limit ourselves to the players online in the immediate system, for now.

It begins with the sov holders. They have placed structures, POS and Outpost, which can give shelter to players.
This shelter, in many ways like a cloak, removes them from practical access by hostile players.

Should we also add in a mechanic to affect players in a POS, or Outpost?
( I am not venturing into Meta-gaming aspects here, unless you do )

The simple truth, is that removing or blocking access to these structures is a completely different level of PvP, one which the PvE players can also evade with proper effort. Considering them on the same level as cloaking pretends that the PvE player actually has no control over assets protected by these structures.

Any ship short of a super capital can dock, and those can still sit in a POS.
Only a very specific list of ships are capable of warping while being cloaked. All others are either stuck on grid, or needing to drop their cloaks before entering warp.

So, I'll trade you access to affecting regular cloaked / CovOps cloaked vessels, if you trade me docked / POS sitting ones.

I think we can all get something here.
Wulfy Johnson
NorCorp Security
#543 - 2015-01-23 16:48:32 UTC
Random deactivation timer on cloacks between 30min and 2hours.. Means you have to check up on the alt and not forget it..
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#544 - 2015-01-23 16:55:36 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor. A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player.

You are crossing a line, with this logic.

By expressing a desire to have the ability to affect cloaked characters, it begs the question of adding in the means to access any character not normally available to interact with.

Let's limit ourselves to the players online in the immediate system, for now.

It begins with the sov holders. They have placed structures, POS and Outpost, which can give shelter to players.
This shelter, in many ways like a cloak, removes them from practical access by hostile players.

Should we also add in a mechanic to affect players in a POS, or Outpost?
( I am not venturing into Meta-gaming aspects here, unless you do )

The simple truth, is that removing or blocking access to these structures is a completely different level of PvP, one which the PvE players can also evade with proper effort. Considering them on the same level as cloaking pretends that the PvE player actually has no control over assets protected by these structures.

Any ship short of a super capital can dock, and those can still sit in a POS.
Only a very specific list of ships are capable of warping while being cloaked. All others are either stuck on grid, or needing to drop their cloaks before entering warp.

So, I'll trade you access to affecting regular cloaked / CovOps cloaked vessels, if you trade me docked / POS sitting ones.

I think we can all get something here.


POS can be attacked ...
Outpost can be attacked, and once changed hands, redocking and services refused.

No need for any trade off or changes.

but yeah, ... this string of logic is going off topic methinks.

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#545 - 2015-01-23 17:04:30 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor.


You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure.

Quote:

A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player.



That 'threat' only exists in the minds of those who are not prepared for it (or, more likely, can't be arsed to prepare for it). The only power that AFK cloaker has is that which the 'residents' give them. I give them none therefor they leave me alone and go after easier targets. "Problem" solved.



It's the exact same complaint as high sec ganking. 7 going on 8 years of playing in high sec and I've never suffered a gank. I fit to survive (my high sec mission Mach has no resist hole, enough ehp to make a gank hard and has a neut in the high slot for example), I fit in such a way as to make ganking unprofitable (Pith XL boosters are cheap lol), I remain aware of my surroundings etc etc so gankers elave me alone because im a hard target.

Meanwhile Mr min/maxed - blingy - maximum isk per hour - purple mod -not even glancing at local for blinky people -not even wathcing d-scan for catalysts or tornadoes Carebear guy gets ganked and all of a sudden "someone has got to do something about this, they need to give me a way to fight back against gankers, allowing ganking will chase the new players (who can somehow afford Officer fit mission battleships) away from the game!!!!"




Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#546 - 2015-01-23 17:27:57 UTC
Nikk wrote:

You are crossing a line, with this logic.

By expressing a desire to have the ability to affect cloaked characters, it begs the question of adding in the means to access any character not normally available to interact with.


In what world have I crossed a line? The thread is about "AFK campers" I specifically said "A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player." Never in this thread have I implied that it should extend anywhere beyond this scope and my last post didnt do that either.

Also in regards to POS and Station. Those arguments have been proven invalid as both those items do not offer the same safety net as a cloak. A cloak can never be broken or located. A POS and a station show a location and a POS can be destroyed.

Jenn wrote:

That 'threat' only exists in the minds of those who are not prepared for it (or, more likely, can't be arsed to prepare for it). The only power that AFK cloaker has is that which the 'residents' give them. I give them none therefor they leave me alone and go after easier targets. "Problem" solved.


That's not completely true. The threat is always there however one can be prepared for it. However it's impossible to tell the size of a BlOps fleet that might follow in on a cyno. I agree being prepared is good but I see no reason why anyone should just let that threat exist and not be able to confront it in some fashion.

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)

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#547 - 2015-01-23 17:27:57 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor.


You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure.

I don't think you realize the implications of what your saying. Or how ridiculous they are.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#548 - 2015-01-23 17:42:39 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor.


You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure.

I don't think you realize the implications of what your saying. Or how ridiculous they are.


I've lived all over null sec (starting in Syndicate in 2008 and Omist later than year). I rtend to advocate for dead end systems being ratting systems in whatever alliance I am in because if you can get a guy called out in intel coming you way, that gives you a chance to get an alt into a sabre and get the gate bubbled before they arrive.

Then it's just a decloaking game (or was before ceptors became immune to bubbles, but ceptors have a decloaking delay unlike bombers, it's the bombers and recons you REALLY want to catch before they cloak in your system). Wormholes have complicated this but you can anchor a bubble on a wormhole just as easy.

Some of us actually try to play the game before we run to mommie (ccp) to fix it for us.


NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Doomheim
#549 - 2015-01-23 17:43:36 UTC  |  Edited by: NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
An AFK player cannot hurt you.


Such a often parroted, yet clearly moronic statement. Nobody is saying afk people can hurt you. The issue is clearly that you can't tell if they are afk or not. They can be afk all day and come back for a few minutes a day. Because of this simple and indefensible act, entire systems are rendered unusable in PVE just because some guy can enter a system, cloak up and go afk all day yet still remain a threat.

Aggressors still have it way too easy in this crusty old game. It so very much a carebears pvp game where paper, rock, or scissors decides the outcome rather than player skill. This is part of why EVE is such a joke to real pvp gamers.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#550 - 2015-01-23 17:46:08 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Nikk had said:
You are crossing a line, with this logic.

By expressing a desire to have the ability to affect cloaked characters, it begs the question of adding in the means to access any character not normally available to interact with.



In what world have I crossed a line? The thread is about "AFK campers" I specifically said "A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player." Never in this thread have I implied that it should extend anywhere beyond this scope and my last post didnt do that either.

Also in regards to POS and Station. Those arguments have been proven invalid as both those items do not offer the same safety net as a cloak. A cloak can never be broken or located. A POS and a station show a location and a POS can be destroyed.

Being untouchable, perhaps, but only so long as they exclusively touch nothing themselves.

You, as you once accused me, are perhaps being willfully ignorant.

You say that this camper is a threat, and that they have great potential.
And YET... the fact remains supreme, that the ship which this cloaked player interacts with is completely up to the PvE player.
Should the PvE player come out with something too tough, or have too many friends around, that cloaked player has no meaningful threat to work with.

Fittings and Friends.
You are content to accuse the cloaked player of having these in abundance, but in the same breath suggest that matching this potential asks too much of the PvE players in question.
A cloaked player, as agreed by many, does not have this group of friends available at all times, and is themselves not believed to be present at all times, hence the description of being AFK.

This reasoning effectively admits awareness that the cloaked player is believed to be BLUFFING.
That hostile name in local may have nothing to throw at the PvE player, and so limited is actually no threat in truth.
But you don't know when this condition exists, just like they don't know when the PvE player has the advantage.

This is not as one sided as your claims make it out to be.


Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn wrote:

That 'threat' only exists in the minds of those who are not prepared for it (or, more likely, can't be arsed to prepare for it). The only power that AFK cloaker has is that which the 'residents' give them. I give them none therefor they leave me alone and go after easier targets. "Problem" solved.


That's not completely true. The threat is always there however one can be prepared for it. However it's impossible to tell the size of a BlOps fleet that might follow in on a cyno. I agree being prepared is good but I see no reason why anyone should just let that threat exist and not be able to confront it in some fashion.

This assumes the blops fleet is real, and not a bluff.

It also assumes the cloaked player has certain knowledge regarding the PvE player's available threat potential, which is patently unavailable to them in the same manner the PvE player is also facing uncertainty.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#551 - 2015-01-23 17:50:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:

In what world have I crossed a line? The thread is about "AFK campers" I specifically said "A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player." Never in this thread have I implied that it should extend anywhere beyond this scope and my last post didnt do that either.


Then you don't understand how interconnected EVE is. Lots of people who post in F&I don't, and don't understand that the reason why some of their emotinally driven 'proposals' fall on deaf ears is because that proposal would screw something else up.

For example, all this talk of cloak fuel or timers etc. What about those of us who are carebearing, going to do an escalation somehwere in null (2-10 jumps away from out ratting system) who then have to afk for a screaming kid. So we just have to log off instead of being able to cloak and take care of real life because some of you people can't deal with afk cloakers.

The ideas about being able to actively hunt cloakers are even worse, so now we lose out plex ships to cloaky hunting neutrals because YOU couldn't learn how to deal with AFK cloakers in your own ratting system.

Cloaks are the number one defense tool for people doing escalations in 'wild' territory, without them their would be a LOT more people in null hunting people doing escalations because warping out and cloaking would be useless then.

While you think 'doing something about afk cloakers' is a good idea, the people who would get screwed are PVE players who don't have stations to fall back on.

Quote:

That's not completely true. The threat is always there however one can be prepared for it. However it's impossible to tell the size of a BlOps fleet that might follow in on a cyno. I agree being prepared is good but I see no reason why anyone should just let that threat exist and not be able to confront it in some fashion.


If someone wants to drop a blops fleet on my 12 million isk fighter ratting Industrial more power to them, they will spend more in jump fuel than the kill is worth unless they can trap a fighter or 2.

Or do you think yo are somehow entitled to rat in pirate battleships and carriers?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#552 - 2015-01-23 17:58:59 UTC
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
An AFK player cannot hurt you.


Such a often parroted, yet clearly moronic statement. Nobody is saying afk people can hurt you. The issue is clearly that you can't tell if they are afk or not. They can be afk all day and come back for a few minutes a day. Because of this simple and indefensible act, entire systems are rendered unusable in PVE just because some guy can enter a system, cloak up and go afk all day yet still remain a threat.

Aggressors still have it way too easy in this crusty old game. It so very much a carebears pvp game where paper, rock, or scissors decides the outcome rather than player skill. This is part of why EVE is such a joke to real pvp gamers.


So much a joke that you are still paying to be heard here as evidenced by your posting privileges.

You unwittingly illustrated the truth though. The 'problem' for these people isn't the threat, it's the uncertainty. Afk cloaking makes local not be the 100% perfect intel tool they rely on, and that rubs them the wrong way.


When they ask for 'active counter measures' they aren't looking at a way to mitigate a threat (I've already demonstrated multiple ways to do that), they are asking for a way to defeat the uncertainty presented by an afk cloaker. This is why we haven't seen one SINGLE complaint about afk cloaking in Wormhole space (where it is much more dangerous as people can't even see you in local). Wormholers (bless their psychotic little souls) are used to uncertainty and react accordingly.

Null sec afk cloak whiners let themselves be fooled by the effectiveness of local and an afk cloaker destroys that illusion thus the repeated pleas for CCP intervention. Again no different than high sec gank whining, Gankers break the illusion of "high security" space.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#553 - 2015-01-23 18:01:13 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor.


You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure.

I don't think you realize the implications of what your saying. Or how ridiculous they are.


I've lived all over null sec (starting in Syndicate in 2008 and Omist later than year). I rtend to advocate for dead end systems being ratting systems in whatever alliance I am in because if you can get a guy called out in intel coming you way, that gives you a chance to get an alt into a sabre and get the gate bubbled before they arrive.

Then it's just a decloaking game (or was before ceptors became immune to bubbles, but ceptors have a decloaking delay unlike bombers, it's the bombers and recons you REALLY want to catch before they cloak in your system). Wormholes have complicated this but you can anchor a bubble on a wormhole just as easy.

Some of us actually try to play the game before we run to mommie (ccp) to fix it for us.



So you think having to camp a gate for 23/7 is a valid tactic to keep someone out? And simply finding a single moment when the system is vulnerable means you wont have to risk anything beyond that?

Beyond travelling, you dont risk anything, but gain quite a bit of advantage. Depending on ship and cloak type you can gain a massive advantage. There is no hard counter to this. You can play the meta game and hope that works out, but thats it. And attempting to hunt them is currently a joke. You have to hope that the pilot is actually active at that time and doesnt recognize your bait for what it is.

Problem with how cloaks currently work is the amount of safety they grant versus how much effort or risk is taken. Fit a T1 cloak to your rookie ship and viola you are now untouchable eyes in system. Should that really be all it takes to offer invulnerability?

Your idea of system defense is a little too binary for it to actually be engaging or fun.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#554 - 2015-01-23 18:13:11 UTC
Jenn wrote:

For example, all this talk of cloak fuel or timers etc. What about those of us who are carebearing, going to do an escalation somehwere in null (2-10 jumps away from out ratting system) who then have to afk for a screaming kid. So we just have to log off instead of being able to cloak and take care of real life because some of you people can't deal with afk cloakers.


This argument here invalidated every argument you have in favor of cloak and invalidates every single criticism of PVE players you have made. This just shows that all you are interested in is maintaining your 100% safety net. Any change to how that safety net worked would mean you have to suddenly be at the keyboard and playing which is what CCP wants. Which is well illustrated by CCPs change of stance on ISBoxer.

You hammer people here saying they dont know how to play the game, yet you sit here and try to justify your stance by complaining about not being able to take 30 seconds to safe log off? Even if the statement doesnt directly relate to you, if you are going to use it as an example, you have to be in favor of it.

No other argument needs to be made on your part. Your stance is clear. You wish to maintain the 100% safety net provided by cloak and you admit that it is exactly that.

My argument has been and always will be that the 100% safety net provided by a cloak for a ship already in a system is a flaw. it allows for the exact situation you described.

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)

Wulfy Johnson
NorCorp Security
#555 - 2015-01-23 18:18:04 UTC
Dont forget to add how to prepare for what's not on the other end of a cyno in comparisment of wh's..
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#556 - 2015-01-23 18:20:25 UTC
Nikk I would just quote your entire post but its not worth it.

Effectively you are just twisting statements in an attempt to make them fit your stance.

Nikk wrote:

Being untouchable, perhaps, but only so long as they exclusively touch nothing themselves.


You even admit it here. Yes, a cloaked ship once in a system is completely untouchable. I am not talking about gates, or travel or anything else. Nothing in the game compares to the safety of a ship sitting in space, cloaked.

That has been my entire point. It is the only flaw I have ever seen in cloaks and is one that can be abused. It makes absolutely no difference what the intention of the pilot in a system is. Hostile, or not. Why should a ship be able to sit in space with absolute safety. NOTHING in the game provides that. Not POSs or Stations.

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)

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#557 - 2015-01-23 18:29:27 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Jenn wrote:

For example, all this talk of cloak fuel or timers etc. What about those of us who are carebearing, going to do an escalation somehwere in null (2-10 jumps away from out ratting system) who then have to afk for a screaming kid. So we just have to log off instead of being able to cloak and take care of real life because some of you people can't deal with afk cloakers.


This argument here invalidated every argument you have in favor of cloak and invalidates every single criticism of PVE players you have made. This just shows that all you are interested in is maintaining your 100% safety net. Any change to how that safety net worked would mean you have to suddenly be at the keyboard and playing which is what CCP wants. Which is well illustrated by CCPs change of stance on ISBoxer.

You hammer people here saying they dont know how to play the game, yet you sit here and try to justify your stance by complaining about not being able to take 30 seconds to safe log off? Even if the statement doesnt directly relate to you, if you are going to use it as an example, you have to be in favor of it.

No other argument needs to be made on your part. Your stance is clear. You wish to maintain the 100% safety net provided by cloak and you admit that it is exactly that.

My argument has been and always will be that the 100% safety net provided by a cloak for a ship already in a system is a flaw. it allows for the exact situation you described.


This is where you demonstrate that deep down you know you're wrong, because you're grasping at straws.

It was you who revealed your motivation, you want a way to take an 'aggressive stance' against people who can't even hurt you while they are cloaked. In fine double standard fashion you then question my own motivations (demonstrating that you don't want to acknowledge how selfish your own motivation is).

What funnier is that you then appeal to authority with that CCP stuff. "CCP wants you to be at the keyboard" lol. We aren't talking about what CCP wants, were talking about why the self serving things you want are invalid. Use the tools the game has if you think afk cloaking is a problem, but don't advocate for changes to the game because you can't be bothered to protect yourself.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#558 - 2015-01-23 18:35:02 UTC
Jenn wrote:

It was you who revealed your motivation, you want a way to take an 'aggressive stance' against people who can't even hurt you while they are cloaked. In fine double standard fashion you then question my own motivations (demonstrating that you don't want to acknowledge how selfish your own motivation is).


LOL what? I have always said I wish to bring the fight to the cloaky camper. My stance completely revolves around the idea that I think the 100% safety net is a flaw. Why you continue to assert that a cloaky camper is harmless is your own fault. We all know they are not, we all know why they are there. My stance is pretty clear and its hardly selfish.

Please stop the smoke and mirrors. My stance is pretty straight forward.

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)

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#559 - 2015-01-23 18:39:47 UTC
Rowells wrote:


So you think having to camp a gate for 23/7 is a valid tactic to keep someone out? And simply finding a single moment when the system is vulnerable means you wont have to risk anything beyond that?

Beyond travelling, you dont risk anything, but gain quite a bit of advantage. Depending on ship and cloak type you can gain a massive advantage. There is no hard counter to this. You can play the meta game and hope that works out, but thats it. And attempting to hunt them is currently a joke. You have to hope that the pilot is actually active at that time and doesnt recognize your bait for what it is.

Problem with how cloaks currently work is the amount of safety they grant versus how much effort or risk is taken. Fit a T1 cloak to your rookie ship and viola you are now untouchable eyes in system. Should that really be all it takes to offer invulnerability?

Your idea of system defense is a little too binary for it to actually be engaging or fun.


Bolded is the flaw. it's the same argument high sec people make when they say that gankers don't "pay" enough when they kill untanked industrial ships with destroyers (ie combat ships). It's nonsense, worrying about how much effort someone else is making rather than simply figuring out how you can make yourself safe no matter HOW MUCH effort they take is a character trait of people who complain about such things. Basically it's a victim mentality.

The things I do to keep myself safe from afk cloakers and bad guys in null in general (syuch as wathcing intel, wathcing local, fitting to survive, making sure my overview is set right so i can warp out if I need to, arrange for defense fleet in whatever system im ratting in and DEFEND OUR ACCESS POINTS etc) take some effort and thinking, in fact they take more effort than fitting a cloak to a ship and traveling somewhere which is what afk cloakers do.

That's fine because I'm the one who wants to not die lol. Worrying about how much effort someone else is putting in takes time away from my thinking about playing the game and thus my enjoyment. I don't expect CCP to play this game for me, and if somehow the 'field' isn't level I level it for myself, because I stopped needing to run to mommie for help some decades ago lol.

I don't think this is an unreasonable standard for a mostly adult gaming community.
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#560 - 2015-01-23 18:41:02 UTC
I agree with Jen on everything on this page. Ive lived in HS, LS, and null. Ive flown cloaky ships, and was on the recieving end of cloaky campers back when i used to grind anoms in null.

intel channels are invaluable for this type of thing (prepare gatecamp for incoming threat). Or, BAIT the camper with friends. You are in an alliance right? There are often 5+ ppl in a ratting system at any given time. Why dont you set up bait to kill the camper? "But ill get hot dropped!". If you know it will happen, then PREPARE for it. Its not rocket science. If you dunk their blop squad, the chances of them coming back are slim.

This is even easier for those cloaky campers that like to linger for weeks, and blop drop miners/ratting ships. Grab a few tanky pvp BS, sit in plex, wait for pew. Have help in station/pos, once cyno pops, warp in your own support and dominate. But that takes socializing and working together. Which many ratters/pve players would just prefer to complain on the forums.

If it was really bad, go to a different ratting system. Many alliances i was in had multiple ratting systems, easily accessible via JB. If one was cloaky camped, and i couldnt get help, id just go to another system. Revolutionary, i know.