Player Features and Ideas Discussion

There is nothing wrong with automated trade orders. It is the same as AFK skill training.

Well my proposed solution was only focussed on the AFK part, so as to make it easier to work out when they were likely to be AFK, it was always intended to have doubt and uncertainty within it so people would be asking were they or weren't they. It was also intended to make people work for the intel by having to observe the campers using the flag to get the intel to understand their patterns and properly ascertain risk. Those just relying on the flag without the leg work by themselves or others were still at risk. To me a simple AFK flag on someone was not enough, but for others it would be.

I also wanted to see something in space that was vulnerable to attack which had real benefit to both sides, so a camper would want to remove it and the one doing local, in other words a conflict driver. But of course you know all this from earlier even if you disagree.

I will be watching what CCP do because I have not given up totally on Eve, as I keep saying there is so much right with the game.

Have fun... o7

It is your only counter to local...

Your as in you, being that you are not up to doing anything else to get around it...

So, the only reason for literally anyone to complain about AFK cloaking is because of overreliance on local as an intel source.

It seems to me that local is the problem, but its a problem that is deeply ingrained in to the overall design of the game. Warping, align times, the entirety of the tackle role and points, etc. is, after 13 years, heavily balanced around the fact that local exists.

An AFK cloaker is a potential threat, and once which encourages enhanced awareness of the environment. The unpredictability that AFK cloaking adds to the game is, IMO, healthy. EVE is, in its entirety, too predictable and too full of free and easy intel.

Dscan and probe scanners are good, active intel. Local, API lookups from killboards are bad, passive intel. I spend most of my time in wormholes. Using common sense and active intel methods is a way of life. It works, and it isn't even that hard. Warping alone is already an extremely powerful reactive defense against suprises. It is easier to flee a potential attacker in EVE than any other PvP MMO. It is really the only defense against unexpected engagements that should be needed, and much of the game is designed around it.

AFK cloaking, as annoying as it is, really IS the only counterplay against free intel from local. AFK cloaking doesn't need a counter because tools already exist in game to feed live, granular intel about actual enemy movements. Those tools doesn't work against cloaked ships, but cloaked ships by their very nature suffer disadvantages for employing that form of intel defense.

People who complain about AFK cloaking are simply too accustomed to relying on lazy intel, and that same lazy intel cuts out a lot of opportunities and considerations for active intel. We can't get rid of local at this point, and because we can't get rid of local we don't need to get rid of AFK cloaking. It's fine.

There are non-intrusive solution to the enduring afk element.

The small booster charges solution for various mining vessels is one way to go. A cloaked vessel can carry cheap, player built charges for the cloak with an ammo capacity sufficient for 5 hours of uninterrupted cloakiness.

That would be more than enough of a nerf in my opinion. All it means is a player has to monitor the cloaky vessel once in a while and restock on charges once in a great while.

I do realize it impacts on some 0-effort playing styles. But a certain minimum level of activity should be required in order to implicitly threaten space activity in any given system.

And again screwing over active cloak users and especially w-space to fix a non-issue... This has been covered already and it's s bad idea.

Wander
I am not seeing the "screwing over" the active cloak users (I spend more than 75% of my time actively using a cloak in null-sec).

The length of this thread demonstrates there are issues.

Thank you for sharing your opinion Wander. You have every right to have as many of those as you like.

Wander
Perhaps you should desist in ad-hominems if you are concerned about ISD. I did not like to report you last time, but I will do so again if required. Frequent cool-off periods seemed to do you good.

Close to 7000 posts. Revolving around afk cloaky camping and its effect on player created content in the game.

I think the link solution is promising. Ongrid if you want to impact. Using charges to do so.

A similar solution for cloaking is reasonable (5 hour ammo capacity. Affordable and widely available ammunition that takes up very little M3).

This is not a bad idea. Which I think you know at some level. Hence making it about people, not about the ideas presented.

Again, thank you for your opinion. I do however think you are misrepresenting the vast majority of posters on this topic.

Most of us just want content, bro.

Would you care to expound on how a 5 hour ammunition capacity cloak with affordable, low M3 volume charges impacts at all on active gameplay?

I wait with bated breath.