These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#9381 - 2017-04-29 14:12:10 UTC
Now Life wrote:


Then why do you bring up the cyno then? Your issue is with it's ability to have a rapidly increasing amount of enemies in your system. You just don't want to nerf it since you use it too. Wanting to nerf cloaks to stop cyno's so you can PVE in perfect safety is quite funny to me as you are supposed to live in a dangerous part of New Eden....



i have no problems with cloakt ships with cyno on it as long as they actively play
i have problems when the cloakt ship (character) remains online player go to work / sleep : AFK for long time and not active
If the Afk cloaker have no cyno you do not need backup fleet on standby just watch intel [/quote]

So again, you want 100% perfect safety, got it.

Wormholer for life.

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#9382 - 2017-04-29 17:07:19 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Right. Non-Consent only applies to your targets, it should never ever be allowed to come back to the hunter.


Ah yes, the same tired old bleating about "I MUST PVP THIS". You've provided no good reasons for your blanket statements that everything must be vulnerable to attack at all times, you've just declared it to be true. And you continue to overlook the massive balance problems that come with every proposal to add vulnerability to cloaked ships: either the counter is ineffective at best and non-consent applies only in theory, or the counter is way too easy and effectively removes cloaks from the game. And I have no idea why you consider this "ALL MUST BE VULNERABLE" principle to be more important than the practical balance consequences of your obsession with it.


You are questioning if someone should be venerable at all.

This is the entire basis of the 'OMG, PvE'rs are TOO SAFE, must counter Local'. How do you justify that argument if people aren't supposed to be venerable?

Lets skip the part where the cloaked ship isn't interacting with the game, because anyone can refuse to interact with or without a cloak and there are plenty of things a cloaked ship can do including some things you can't while in station, and clearly you are because otherwise this thread would not exist. We can skip the compromised combat potential because plenty of ships are weaker.

The entire point is that people are actively evading hunters who then get butthurt that they missed easy targets, and yet you advocate infinite safety at even less effort for your own playstyle.
Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9383 - 2017-04-29 17:37:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Now Life
Wander Prian wrote:
Now Life wrote:


Then why do you bring up the cyno then? Your issue is with it's ability to have a rapidly increasing amount of enemies in your system. You just don't want to nerf it since you use it too. Wanting to nerf cloaks to stop cyno's so you can PVE in perfect safety is quite funny to me as you are supposed to live in a dangerous part of New Eden....



i have no problems with cloakt ships with cyno on it as long as they actively play
i have problems when the cloakt ship (character) remains online player go to work / sleep : AFK for long time and not active
If the Afk cloaker have no cyno you do not need backup fleet on standby just watch intel


So again, you want 100% perfect safety, got it.[/quote]

and no not again
When did i say , i want 100% perfect safety ?
EVE is never safe and I do not want 100% perfect safety

It is just not normal that 1 person can camp 23h45min a day and not even be home for 18h of it .
Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9384 - 2017-04-29 18:03:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Now Life
just an idea

You have : Mobile Cynosural Inhibitors
- 100km effective range
Two minute activation time.

May not be deployed within 200km of another Mobile Cynosural Inhibitor, within 75km of Stargates, Stations or Upwell Structures, or within 40km of a Starbase. Cannot be retrieved once deployed.
Self-destructs after one hour of operation.

You have : Mobile S / M / L Warp Disruputors
- not possible to deploy in 2500m of a gat / ship / WH / ......

Why not a : Mobile Cloaking Disruptor
Same restrictions and effective range as the Mobile Cynosural Inhibitors + do not decloak ships in warp + May not be deployed within 75km of any other deployed Mobile structure

and even : The massive energy required to project this field causes the mobile Cloaking Disruptor itself to be extremely visible to combat probes and directional scans.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9385 - 2017-04-29 18:49:44 UTC
Now Life wrote:
Why not a : Mobile Cloaking Disruptor


Because "LOL HAY GUYS LETS REMOVE CLOAKS AND THEN NOTHING CAN CATCH ME" is a stupid idea.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9386 - 2017-04-29 18:54:18 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
This is the entire basis of the 'OMG, PvE'rs are TOO SAFE, must counter Local'. How do you justify that argument if people aren't supposed to be venerable?


Oh FFS, are you illiterate? We've told you over and over again that the reason is that cloaked ships are just sitting there, while PvE players are farming ISK at maximum efficiency with near-zero risk. Obviously farming the most profitable PvE content in the game should have a higher level of risk than sitting idle in a safespot waiting for an opportunity to do something (at which point risk applies again).

Quote:
We can skip the compromised combat potential because plenty of ships are weaker.


No we can't. You can't just handwave away the major balancing factor of cloaking ships being significantly weaker than similar ships in their size class. A covert ops frigate is effectively unarmed, and a cloaking recon ship is much weaker than a HAC or combat recon. And they have similar ISK costs, similar skill requirements, etc, the only difference is the ability to fit a cloak vs. better combat power.
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale
#9387 - 2017-04-29 19:03:19 UTC
Now Life wrote:
Why not a : Mobile Cloaking Disruptor
Same restrictions and effective range as the Mobile Cynosural Inhibitors + do not decloak ships in warp + May not be deployed within 75km of any other deployed Mobile structure

and even : The massive energy required to project this field causes the mobile Cloaking Disruptor itself to be extremely visible to combat probes and directional scans.

Yeah, and let's remove bombs and bomb launchers along with it.

None of your "ideas" are going to matter because you're a dumb carebear that doesn't understand anything at all about cloaky gameplay.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9388 - 2017-04-29 19:10:52 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Now Life wrote:
Why not a : Mobile Cloaking Disruptor


Because "LOL HAY GUYS LETS REMOVE CLOAKS AND THEN NOTHING CAN CATCH ME" is a stupid idea.



When did I sai LETS REMOVE CLOAKS ?
You have min 100km you can fly and not be decloakt with my proposal only now you need to fly your cloakt ship around a
Very recognizable and visible cloak disruptor

to difficult ?
Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9389 - 2017-04-29 19:18:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Now Life
Linus Gorp wrote:
Now Life wrote:
Why not a : Mobile Cloaking Disruptor
Same restrictions and effective range as the Mobile Cynosural Inhibitors + do not decloak ships in warp + May not be deployed within 75km of any other deployed Mobile structure

and even : The massive energy required to project this field causes the mobile Cloaking Disruptor itself to be extremely visible to combat probes and directional scans.

Yeah, and let's remove bombs and bomb launchers along with it.

None of your "ideas" are going to matter because you're a dumb carebear that doesn't understand anything at all about cloaky gameplay.



Thank you for treating me and my ideas with respect

kind regards
dumb carebear

according to a " Pls do not make pvp too hard CCP or i Suck at it " PVPer
Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9390 - 2017-04-29 19:59:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Now Life
For all the people who think I'm against cloak gameplay

Answer is no

I fly daily cloak ships ( recon / SB and Transport Ships)
And yes Now Life is a ALT

But never will I camp a system / region and be AFK cloakt for more than 3h ( food / cleaning)
My thought about long time AFK cloak is Weak pvp

Everyone has the right to express his opinion in a normal civilized way
And SB are weak hull but lot of speed and DPS for a frig hull
So you need the cloak to Sneak up your target and travel , not to go AFK the whole day long
I even know when Sb hade cruise missile launchers fitted Instead of torps .
Everyone then said : This is the end for SB Ugh

Ships and modules are constantly changing in EVE , PVP and industrial ships /mods to balance the fragile game play of everyone in EVE .

Do you know what you do best?

You adjust to the new game rules
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9391 - 2017-04-29 20:05:28 UTC
Now Life wrote:
When did I sai LETS REMOVE CLOAKS ?


When you said "let me put down a deployable next to my PvE ship that prevents a cloaked ship from getting anywhere near me while I farm my PvE content".

Quote:
But never will I camp a system / region and be AFK cloakt for more than 3h ( food / cleaning)
My thought about long time AFK cloak is Weak pvp


My thought is that "weak PvP" is the whining of someone who doesn't understand what EVE is about. Dead is dead, you don't get bonus points for "strong" PvP.

Quote:
Everyone has the right to express his opinion in a normal civilized way


And my opinion is that your opinion is ****ing stupid.

Quote:
And SB are weak hull but lot of speed and DPS for a frig hull


They only have DPS against larger targets, and will die long before they can get through a larger ship's tank. You know, because they're glass cannons with T1 frigate levels of HP and no room to fit a tank.

Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9392 - 2017-04-29 20:14:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Now Life
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Now Life wrote:
When did I sai LETS REMOVE CLOAKS ?


When you said "let me put down a deployable next to my PvE ship that prevents a cloaked ship from getting anywhere near me while I farm my PvE content".

Quote:
But never will I camp a system / region and be AFK cloakt for more than 3h ( food / cleaning)
My thought about long time AFK cloak is Weak pvp


My thought is that "weak PvP" is the whining of someone who doesn't understand what EVE is about. Dead is dead, you don't get bonus points for "strong" PvP.

Quote:
Everyone has the right to express his opinion in a normal civilized way


And my opinion is that your opinion is ****ing stupid.

Quote:
And SB are weak hull but lot of speed and DPS for a frig hull


They only have DPS against larger targets, and will die long before they can get through a larger ship's tank. You know, because they're glass cannons with T1 frigate levels of HP and no room to fit a tank.



a 2min onlining timer
16 Sb killing a carrier below 5min
1 SB have Enough dps to kill a Faction BS
Ever heard of speed fit , target painter ,censor damp
You need to adjust your fit according to your Victims
And if you attack Any type of ship with the wrong type ship you loos

Its not te poind of cloakin but of long time AFK cloaking

And now I know you miss a civilized upbringing
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9393 - 2017-04-29 20:16:12 UTC
Now Life wrote:
16 Sb killing a carrier below 5min


I fail to see the problem here. If you bring a 16v1 numbers advantage of course you should win.

Quote:
1 SB have Enough dps to kill a Faction BS


No they don't, because the bomber can't survive long enough to finish off its target.

Quote:
Ever heard of speed fit , target painter ,censor damp


Ever hear of drones?
Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9394 - 2017-04-29 20:24:26 UTC


Quote:
1 SB have Enough dps to kill a Faction BS


No they don't, because the bomber can't survive long enough to finish off its target.


[/quote]


https://zkillboard.com/kill/61912734/

ok 2 SB ooo look a drone ship
Maria Dragoon
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#9395 - 2017-04-29 21:51:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Maria Dragoon
Now Life wrote:


Quote:
1 SB have Enough dps to kill a Faction BS


No they don't, because the bomber can't survive long enough to finish off its target.



https://zkillboard.com/kill/61912734/

ok 2 SB ooo look a drone ship



I don't get it

You are complaining about how an SB can do a crap ton of damage to a target it was design for (IE, large, low mobility ships) If you bring in frigates, with much better mobility, you can actually force ships to be unable to cloak (insta-lock ships) an interceptors for a lock down.


SBs are design to kill battleships, how are you surpised they killed a...battleship?


Edit: Also, are you sure your concern isn't influenced by this? https://zkillboard.com/kill/55183082/

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."

Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9396 - 2017-04-30 00:27:25 UTC
lol yep i lost a JF to CODE in high sec
Completely different use of SB

Now Life
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9397 - 2017-04-30 00:56:02 UTC
So

What can we do to AFK cloakt ships

Now = Nothing just keep a suport fleet on standby just in the event that he sees an easy target when he is back behind his pc.

Problem : - No way to find him in system
- AFK <- biggest problemi

possible solutions : - When not active with that character for XX h time auto log off ?
- When not active with that character for XX h time Cloak Fades away ?
- When not active with that character for XX h time a possibility to scan him with new type of probes ?
- ...............


Someone have other possible solutions ?

and yes there are other solutions so we do not have to change the cloak

Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9398 - 2017-04-30 00:56:43 UTC
Now Life wrote:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/61912734/

ok 2 SB ooo look a drone ship


That's ONE KILLMAIL, from a 2v1, where a Dominix didn't bother to fit neuts in their highs. Yes, occasionally stupid people will lose ships, but that doesn't mean that cloaking is a problem.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#9399 - 2017-04-30 00:59:52 UTC
Now Life wrote:
Now = Nothing just keep a suport fleet on standby just in the event that he sees an easy target when he is back behind his pc.


No, you keep a support fleet on standby because your alliance is not a trash-tier waste of server space and therefore you have a support fleet on standby at all times when you have active players, regardless of whether or not there is a cloaked ship in the system. This protects you from AFK cloakers at the same time that it protects you from an interceptor getting tackle on you, logon traps, NPC spawns you couldn't handle, whatever it happens to be. Don't act like keeping a support fleet on standby is some exceptional burden that you have to put up with.

Quote:
possible solutions : - When not active with that character for XX h time auto log off ?
- When not active with that character for XX h time Cloak Fades away ?
- When not active with that character for XX h time a possibility to scan him with new type of probes ?


Better possible solution: if they're AFK just ignore them, because they can't hurt you. There's a reason adding people as a contact to check when they're active was nerfed, and you're not getting an equivalent for AFK players.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#9400 - 2017-04-30 04:41:46 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
Now Life wrote:
Thelonious Blake wrote:
And honestly I have yet to see a member of distinguished wormhole group/corporation to moan about cloaking mechanics. And this speaks alot. Prove me wrong with a link.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
being vocal about AFK cloaking doesn't mean the mechanic is broken. Not in the current state of the game, at least by my opinion.



wormhole group/corporations can't be hotdropt by 100+ capitals /BS


It sounds like you have issue with cynos, not with cloaks ...


And with fatigue where does this happen with any regularity these days. Holy ****, cynos get a major nerf with fatigue and jump range nerfs and here we have another "just one more nerf".

Roll

"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