EVE Information Portal

I am not a woman, but I think that this type of language is not welcoming to them. Not that anybody who plays the game probably cares, but you'd hope the devs would at least.

Great to see these changes coming!

Looking forward to further details, especially so we can theory craft the interaction between structure size, corp size and attack mechanics.

Cheers,
Neug

You can always "Log off Safely",
The issue with cloaky campers isn't that they have to chase children around the house, its that they log on in a safe place, and then "we" the rest of the people who live in that space have no clue if they are at a keyboard or not. And you, not being at your keyboard shouldn't provide a negative experience for players who are.

in short - its the "log on, safe up, and then **** off so I can go to work, or take a **** or wtf else the cloaky person does for 23 hrs, and keep the locals wondering if, i'm there or not.

So will you be able to set up your own "pos"? Currently they are all tied into the corp roles meaning that only the selected few get to mess around with the pos stuff.

Would be nice if you could lanch your own pos or lanch for corp thing.

As a woman, I really don't care in the slightest if people use "this type of language". As a matter of fact, I'd be kinda pissed if I knew the devs felt they had to censor themselves just because a few people, men or women, got their panties in a twist.

You've got a right to be offended about things. But that doesn't mean that anyone else has to care if you're offended, and it sure as hell don't give you the right do be offended on anyone else's behalf, and especially not mine.

Not if I'm active and engaging with people to provide said content I can't.

If there is somebody in your system that is afk, they're no threat to you. If they're at their keyboard, then they're not afk.

The same reasoning you're using also applies to people docked up in a sov station. Somebody can log on in a safe place (the station), and then "we" the rest of the people who live in (or visit) that space have no clue if they are at the keyboard or not. Should we advocate for a deployable structure that will kick people out of the station when used? Anybody who is at the keyboard can just dock up again, right?

To quote CCP Greyscale on nullsec from his 2014 GDC talk on crimewatch "choosing to live out here puts you in constant danger". If you think that having somebody who is not blue occupying the same system as you is a "negative experience", then perhaps nullsec isn't the right type of space for you to be in.

i would generally say that quoting CCP Greyscale as a support for your argument is definitely not the way to go, but i guess a broken clock is right twice a day...

This all looks universally awesome. My only confusion is that this all seems to imply that Outposts will obey the same rules as other structures, and therefore will become destroyable. Now, that is perfectly fine with me, and you look to have considered the loosing-stuff-in-station angle, but doesn't this contradict the new sov changes, since the station capture mechanics seem to be very contrary to a system edging towards making them destroyable? Are we misunderstanding things (as in, the loosing stored items is just for dealing with the replacements for POSes, and destroyable station are still off the table) or is the station rules in the sov update just a placeholder until this system can replace it?

Also, I have a bit of a love/worry relationship with the mooring mechanics. It is definitely cool, and I am very for it, but what happens to a "moored" Supercap when you log out? Does it stay there? If so, this adds a lot more danger to Supercap ownership (not intrinsically a bad thing, but it does), but if not, what happens when you log back in, since someone else could be on your mooring spot when you log back in? Plus, Supercap accounts are quite netorious for being left unsubbed for long periods between wars, so does an unsubbed Supercap have to stay moored, or just get stuck chancing out by logging out at a safe spot? If so, again, that is a lot more danger of loss, plus there is going to be vast farms of towers serving as unsubbed mooring.

Personally, I'm all for more risk to Supercaps, and limiting the number in space by the amount of room to moor them is definitely an intresting approach. But there is a hell of a lot in space at the moment, and a move over to this could have quite some growing pains. Especially given how Supercaps are being given the finger by the sov changes, and that the current utterances about Supercap changes are leaving people fairly lukewarm, removing safety from those logged-off or unsubscribed could be a final tipping point for many.

I also have kids and often leave the screen due to IRL-events, often initiated by said kids, or by my wife in the middle of super-imortant-space-ship-fleets dualboxing litterally billions of ISK in the form of a Supercarrier and a Carrier, which is much much worse than a 55 M ISK dictor tbh... ;-).

So I know the feeling!

But you and I already have a plethora of available options today, and even more when the new intel-structures come!

* Cloak in a safespot. THere IS a risk that the enemy will use a "decloaking-function" JUST as you are away for 16 minutes from your screen. But then again, there is a large chance they won't! How do THEY know you ARE actually AFK and not alertly looking for combat probes if you get decloaked?! Huh!? For an alert "AFK-cloaker" that is actually on-screen, it would be a small task to see the decloak, detect the combat probes and just warp off to a new safe and cloak up again looong before they warp into your current safespot.

* Safe-logoff which is possible if you do not have any timers preventing log off. This takes 30s, which probably would be rather safe to run off and save a crying kid, or demanding wife-initiated-task. Still a small chance they decloak AND combat probe you out JUST as you run off, but really....not a problem!

* Leave the system and cloak up in another system nearby, where they do not have the necessary intel-structures up. Cloak up on a safe in a system where there is no intel-structures, and you are TRULY safe. AFAIK the "anti-AFK-cloaking-function" will also be limited in number of uses (cool-down-timer?) and will depend on an available intel-structures and possibly sov-updates for this (?). So keep an alt in a cloaky in a non-structure-system nearby, and you can fly in that one, and go AFK during the cooldown if you want to troll the people more ;-)

* And finally, the risk of loosing a cloaky dictor worth about 55 M ISK should not really be a problem for you - you might aswell loose it in pvp and "**** happens" in EVE as in IRL. This is called "risk" and the reward is that you have a possibility to kill much more valuable ships like deep-space-transports or whatever. Same goes for cloaky Stealth Bombers AFK cloaking systems day out and day in without any active input from the player - they are very cheap compared to what you hunt with them. Loosing a Supercarrier and a carrier currently worth about 35 B ISK would be much worse, but I won't complain when that risk materilize due to IRL-stuff (it has, many times!). That's how this game works!

I think this "decloaking-function" is a good idéa that will make it a bit harder for people to play EVE-online passively. Play it actively, or log off. And the new function will not mean anything and will be easy to counter for players that ARE active. If you happen to be AFK with "legimit reasons" and get killed in the process - well, tough luck, **** happens! I dont think it will reduce the number of cloaky campers significantly either, and when they log on and cloak up, you KNOW they are not AFk so the effect of them beeing in system will only be higher! They will shut down ratting and other activities much more efficiently!