Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Cute, but No. You really don't logic much, do you.

Let's begin:I'm not sure which game you are playing, but it does not sound like EVE. If you are in space, you are supposed to be vulnerable to non-consensual pvp at all times. You had done so well until now not claiming you need an eject button for stations, but I fear you are dipping a little too deep into the Kool-Aid.

Stations were designated the one safe spot in EVE so that players could amass wealth and build value for their characters. They are safe, and for good reason. Being docked in a station is not the same as being in space-- that's why you can't see the grid, run probes, or access any ship functions except cargo. It also comes with a few inherent weaknesses, among which is that your entry into space is easily monitored. I really should not have to explain the difference between the basic game concept of being in space and being in station, but the AFK-Cloak crowd seems uncommonly dense on this subject.

To directly answer what should be glaringly obvious questions you have asked--- Should you be able to be shot if you are

in a station. NO

in a POS. YES, within certain limits.

Logged Out. NO

in a Newbie Ship. YES

on a Trial Account. YES

bonus- in a Newbie Ship while on Trial. YES

Terms and conditions apply, such as first bringing down POS shields or dealing with treason, and maybe newbies in starter systems.

Now you are just quoting from the ganker bible, further eating into any credibility you have as not being a ganker yourself. It's fine if you are, but it makes you look silly if all you care about are killboards and easy kill conditions.

I'm not whining about any form of intel gathering, I just pointed it out as a thing that cloakED ships can do while supposedly being harmless, giving people interested in data security a need to hunt and shoot cloaked ships-- as if a reason other than existing actually needed to be there. Some people use 3rd party resources to augment it, but that's not a balance issue, and if it's something that bothers you suggesting that 'Control+C' be disabled to the client would be the proper course.

The reason local isn't a problem is because it's freely available to everyone, at the same time, in the same way. it's not optional, like a module. In fact, one concession I have ceded to the AFK crowd was that gate cloaks *should* keep the ship off the local roster until it drops, evening out the one, extremely slight advantage already being in the system provides. Teckos will no doubt show up in a bit and quote the first part of that out of context, it's one of his favorites.

But, more than that, Local isn't the total defense tool the AFK crowd claim it to be, and it's easily demonstrated by stepping out of Null into high sec, where it's all but impossible to keep clear. Without the effort of going someplace remote, and utilizing that much overlooked diplomacy and player interaction feature the AFK crowd want to devalue, the local roster is all but useless. Local is only useful when much effort is spent making it that way, and if you want to break that with cloaks, then using the cloak should require similar effort, not just the threat or possilbity of it.

Adorkable, really. I can't jusify it, obviously. Thankfully I don't need too as it doesn't exist. As previously pointed out, local does not bring 100% safety. If it did, you would not have to take action to remain safe when hunters come into system. As such, this is easily discounted as a strawman, as it assumes a condition that does not exist requires justification. There is no safety in Local at all, much less the sort enjoyed by the cloaked ship who can ignore active hunters in system while solo, at no meaningful cost to himself.

Sure you do.

And here we come to a really interesting way to be wrong. It does not matter what the ratter is doing, even if that ratter is you. It's fine that you can be camped, but it's not fine that the camp requires nothing to maintain.

Why do you assume the hunter should not be vulnerable to PvP against him?

See, you can be safe through your own efforts, and that's ok. It's not 100% safe, as there are many things that could cause problems for you, from Awoxers, to Bad Timing, to simple inattention. This safety does not happen in a vacuum, it's the product of much effort and requires constant effort to maintain. You *should* know this, but apparently its slipped your mind in your zeal to support afk cloaks.

This is the actual issue with the safety of cloaks--- they are so safe that they are even effective while AFK, removing any burdensome need for paying attention to remain effective. Safety isn't a bad thing, but cloaks combine too much of it, with too much utility outside the parameters set in the game for total safety.

That would raise the bar on that particular tactic, probably just switching the minimal tactic to training into Blackops and using Cyno to bring more fuel once in a while, or using Blockade Runners.

The better solution is let them do what they want, but not make it risk free by using a cloak that can't be broken no matter how much effort you put into finding it.

Please explain how removing local makes cloaks less invulnerable to detection than they are now? Seems they get stronger in wormholes, not weaker.

Unless you mean that's the trade-off you are willing to consider? I mean... How would you deal with the fallout. The local roster was put in for good reasons, and is vital for many things. Surely you have a plan that does not turn all of EvE into wormholes only worse?

Considering how much of your contribution to the topic has been extreme mental gymnastics involving how cloaks *must* stay invulnerable to all detection lest we break titans, fleet ops, wormholes, and God knows what else, I would have thought an inane 'remove local' response that implies it would balance something would be pure poison for your agenda.

It would also solve the issue as no carebear would every undock anywhere, and by sheer target deprivation the hunters would disappear too.

I'm more thinking along the lines of a delayed local myself. As a tradeoff to huntable cloaks.

Well, you are partially right, but not in a significant way. The cloaked pilot still gets to wander up and take a look at the ratter he wants to tackle while risking very little himself- assuming his goal was to tackle anyone. The cloaker is also still immune to being probed, while the others in local are not, so he can drop his cloak once an hour or so to launch probes, and then just scan whenever he wants. In similar fashion, without even risking the 30 seconds of not being under a cloak, the cloaked ship can make full use of D-Scan.

End result is that he is at an even greater advantage as before, as no one will be able to detect him, while he knows who and what is in system from his invulnerable safe spot. If he's not caught on the gate, he won't be caught unless he chooses to involve himself personally in the fight. Unless the system is cynojammed he can bring in any friends he wants after assuring himself no one else is in system, have them log off, and be perfectly capable of risk free kills practically at will having completely circumvented all defensive measures of the system.

Kinda the fallout I was alluding to. If by delayed local you mean the gate cloak keeps you out of local, or perhaps a 10-15 second lag, that's workable. If you mean the delayed local of wormholes, that's not a good idea.

His risk goes up if he is an idiot. I mean, I suppose he could warp around and look on grid at everything, but he could also just launch some probes and cloak back up, know right where everything was. I mean, no one ever manages to warp at range while cloaked so as to not bump into their target or anything. Ships with cloaks die all the time. Cloaked ships only die to extreme bad luck and pilot error once once in a long while. Citing the vulnerability of a ship that cannot use the cloak it has equipped is no where near proving the vulnerability of a cloaked ship.

The point of the cloak is stealth enabled game play.

There is a pretty wide gulf between enabling stealth and providing 100% unbreakable stealth.

But just to be clear, Lugburz, you see cloaks as they are currently as being in some way underpowered? I mean, removing Local is a pretty huge buff to stealth gameplay as a whole--- not just to people with cloaks turned on. No Local with a Cloak is one of the reasons Wormholes are so unpopular, almost as much as the PITA that navigating them are.. You want that across the whole game?

Everyone, everywhere, pressing Dscan every 5 seconds unless they are in a fleet with one unfortunate soul cursed with the duty? I suppose it would highlight the value of a good scanner, and create a whole new realm of awful with those Scan Inhibitors.

I constantly check dscan whether in low, wh or null space so I'm really not sure what your trying to get at? I pvp mate, using dscan is a must either when looking for targets or checking whats near, I'm also capable of living just fine in wh's - if I want to play eve on easy mode I go back to highsec and just run missions..

Sooo.. the only thing I'm getting from you or other people that want cloaking 'nerfed' is "WHINE WHINE WHINE IM A BAD AND NEED TOBE MOLLYCODDLED.. MOAN, WHINE"

Like I said before, don't like it, go back to hs.

Flat out lie? Ok. There is a cloaked ship somewhere between 100 and 150 kilometers of your ship on grid. Feel free to tell me, having already managed to knowingly get on grid with a cloaked ship and know it's approximate distance from you (currently impossible) how you will go about breaking the cloak...

You can't. Unless you somehow manage to start moving in it's direction out of sheer blind luck, *and* he isn't paying any attention to you so as to move out of your way, that cloak will stay up until he decides to bring it down on his own.

Are you postulating that in wormholes right now they leave ships lying around without pilots to confuse scanners? Are you further claiming that you regularly leave 100KM wide debris fields around anything and everything you feel valuable enough to protect from prying eyes? You can warp to anything at any range, so that's a huge field of debris you are laying down, of things that can't themselves be probed. Remember that your 'remove local' fix won't be in the sealed off little bubbles of wormholes with their natural and random choke points that only allow certain mass through, but will have stable gates and be vulnerable to cynos as well as random wormholes.



So you like to hunt folks... fine. Tell me again how it is that you hunt people using cloaks? Do you find it impossible without setting up a trap that they have to either be stupid enough to fall for or choose to try to break into of their own will? or do you just not hunt those ships because it can't effectively be done, allowing them to be exempt from the non-consensual PvP you so bravely provide to those without weapons?

This isn't about the ratter or miner. This is about the guy hiding under a cloak being immune to any outside force until he decides otherwise. The ratter and miner remain vulnerable to being disrupted by other players constantly, and put out substantial effort to minimize that. They deserve the fruits of their labor. The cloaker gets to set up his camp the one time, and is then forever more immune to hostile players until he decides otherwise. And that's just in the case of that particular tactic that impacts a relatively unimportant player interaction. It's used in every area of space for a variety of things, and the more important that activity, the more vital it becomes that the ship need be vulnerable to hostile player interruption.


Again, it's not about the ratter, miner, or anyone else not hiding under a cloak and immune to hostile player action.

Lazy is an odd characterization for someone who has put out, and continues to put out the level of effort that maintaining an all blue local does... especially in comparison with the 'afk cloaker' who just slides into a system when most everyone else is asleep and then is safe without further efforts for as long as he likes. It's even more odd if applied to those flying active sweeps and patrols for enemy scouts hunting someone who's only challenge is not bumping into something and can simply ignore any effort to locate them.

The problem with this argument is that you are assuming Schrodinger's Defense. Apparently all the ratters and miners in Null are doing absolutely nothing in their own defense, until they are, and it's 100% both ways. It's nothing when you want to call them lazy, it's 100% when you try to catch them. They are afk until you pop into the system, then they are eagle-eyed, with perfect reaction time and are never stuck on a gate or other object, scrammed by NPC's, etc...

So... No answer to any salient points? Just attack the person presenting arguments you don't like in the hopes they will go away.

It's cool, I will take that as evidence that like most of the few defending cloaks in their current state you just don't debate well, and you can't back up your assertion that everything is fine. It's not, and there has been an endless parade of first time, one time, or rarely posting individuals come to these boards for a decade to say so, with the same small handful of people shouting them down with the same inane arguments laced with fallacies and falsely trying to establish equivalence with enabling stealth via module and universal interaction with core game elements.

Like much of EvE, it's just bad game design. Early on it was excusable because they insisted on always reinventing the wheel. They have been doing better as time goes on. Eventually they will get to this. You don't have to look hard to see examples of better designed stealth gameplay. You don't have to have a lot of imagination to see the gap between no stealth and completely unbreakable for all time stealth.

For starters, there are no 'built in' safeties.

The problem you seem to dislike is when hostiles show up a certain class of player just stops playing. You are asking for people to play the game the way you want, and they don't want too.

So, to catch them, you need a way to keep them online against their will, because for those people if they can't get in station they will just log- they aren't interested in the gameplay you are. This isn't something you are ever going to be entitled to.

So your targets are those looking to bait you, those not paying attention, and those defending the system. Since the argument is that cloaks must be 100% or system defense will remove the cloak, then you cannot then claim no one can be engaged. If you want to be entitled to shoot a miner or ratter, I suggest you put an alt in a belt or anomaly somewhere and shoot him.

Basically... Deep in null behind multiple layers of intense defensive strategies you are saying there are few or no readily available soft targets. I will say 'duh' and move on from the point. Those areas should only be as easy to hunt as the locals allow, and complaining that they defend too good is kind of pointless, particularly if you are backing up that complaint with the locals are also being lazy in their defense. It can't be both.

But again... This is not about the ratter or miner. That person is vulnerable, they just don't choose to remain in play for the game you want to play. The cloaker is a different issue- they want to remain in play, and still be immune to non-consensual interaction of any sort at all.