These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates

First post First post First post
Author
SpaceSaft
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#121 - 2015-03-24 11:54:45 UTC
Styphon the Black wrote:
5 people should be able to use guerrilla warfare tactics in a system with 50 enemy players. If 50 players can't figure out how to defend, escort, gate camp and just bait the five hostiles in their system that it on them.


I think we can all agree that nullsec should be dangerous. But reasonably so and that's where the problems start for the hunters and the residents.

The Hunters obviously want a system where they can get in and out, kill a few people and leave. Currently there is no way to stop this, the only tools we have to our disposal are local chat intel and bubbles.

Forming fleets is never fast enough to catch someone when they enter home space and we have absolutely no tools available to fight someone in home space, if they don't want to. None. There is nothing you can do as a defender to force a fight. There are enough examples of MWD fit faction ships that are effectively combate scan immune because scan+warp time allows them to warp somewhere else or just burn 100km+.

Camp the gates? All of them? For how long? Hours, Days? Bubble everything? Babysit everything? This is simply not feasible. This is the exact kind of weaponisation of boredom the new sov is intended to remove.

Observation Arrays could be the tools to force fights. That's all I want from them, really.

Is it too much to ask that when you come to my home, kill my friends and **** on my rug so to speak, that I get the chance to fight you?
Vixel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#122 - 2015-03-24 12:04:10 UTC
Sean Parisi wrote:


OBSERVATORY ARRAYS

  • Allow observatory arrays to help pinpoint specific wormhole types / levels. This could be used with build able ammunition 'probes' which are sent to these sites and then lost - this does not translate over to regular anomaly's (players must scan)
  • Logs of current owned or npc owned gates (delayed on NPC) within the network providing any assortment of information such as Ship Size, Ship, Player, Security Status of Player, Standing of Player and any other variation.
  • Within the grid and slightly outside the grid it will be possible to find further intel into who is supplying goods to market (Allowing us to find out who's selling what and even possibly to who). This allows us to curtail the movement of supplies and even make informed 'ganks' on sellers of high valuable goods.
  • Bounty and Kill Right Tracker. This will provide you with a list of people within grid and slightly outside it whom have killrights or bounties on them. Based on the strength of the network it will tell you where these people are allowing you to hunt them down more effectively.
  • Null now has a default delay to local - Observatories can be used to increase or decrease the delay within occupied systems. But never leading to completely instant local updates (10-20 seconds at least of wait). Making local fill faster or slower. However, intel will always be there via network operators.
  • Scan areas within network for recent kills and losses
  • During grids lifespan allow it to slowly develop a mineral composition of all moons within the area.
  • Increase rare ore spawn rates or even ice spawns
  • Allow the networks to be hacked by outsiders to gain temporary benefit or cause general fuckery and mayhem. Can be counter hacked.
  • Allow all services to possibly be bought by other players.


GATES


  • Toll designations on gate use.
  • Gates may limit size of ships passing through them
  • Gates may be turned off while online - IE defenses still work but no jumps at all are allowed
  • Can be hacked by outsiders to bypass toll / steal some toll or ignore restrictions
  • Can be given modules to increase its strength against hackers (Operators can counter through headquarters counter hacking - IE Minigame vs hacking player that may temporarily disable their ship or other goodies)

  • Public Beacon or Hidden. When hidden it has to be scanned down or bookmarked - 'smugglers gate' vs 'public gate'


ACCELERATION GATES
  • Create dead pockets that player stations can be hidden behind.
  • .



    I quoted the ideas I thought were interesting.
    A couple of things though.

    - Bounty and kill rights need to be looked at, something just seems, off about them...
    - Delayed local is cool, but how about getting rid of local entirely and instead just using a counter in the corner of the screen to indicate total player count in the system? (Make the information you gain from local currently, such as corporation, pilot age, friends/allies, name, etc, something you have to work for instead of something that's just freely given away)
    - Allowing the networks to be hacked/counter hacked is just more unnecessary meta... (ENTOSIS LINKS will be better)
    - Toll on gates between systems that would be otherwise unreachable without those gates in the current universe (not jove space or WH space) = bad... Do not allow a gate that already exists [HED-GP ---> XXX:XX for example] to be controlled and taxed by players. THIS WILL KILL ROAMING GANGS.
    - Modular structures are such a great idea

    MY FAVORITE: DEADSPACE POCKETS
    - PLEASE CCP, let us do this. I want more content that is in the middle of nowhere in space instead of around planets or moons, stuff I have to 'HUNT" for. (change dscan mechanics and this becomes much more feasbible)

    LVXE

    zar dada
    Future Corps
    Sleeper Social Club
    #123 - 2015-03-24 12:35:42 UTC
    Can my corporation prevent personal/out of corp structures in a system? Using some kind of module? Or observatory structure?
    Sean Parisi
    Blackrise Vanguard
    United Caldari Space Command.
    #124 - 2015-03-24 12:52:41 UTC
    Vixel wrote:


    I quoted the ideas I thought were interesting.
    A couple of things though.

    - Bounty and kill rights need to be looked at, something just seems, off about them...
    - Delayed local is cool, but how about getting rid of local entirely and instead just using a counter in the corner of the screen to indicate total player count in the system? (Make the information you gain from local currently, such as corporation, pilot age, friends/allies, name, etc, something you have to work for instead of something that's just freely given away)
    - Allowing the networks to be hacked/counter hacked is just more unnecessary meta... (ENTOSIS LINKS will be better)
    - Toll on gates between systems that would be otherwise unreachable without those gates in the current universe (not jove space or WH space) = bad... Do not allow a gate that already exists [HED-GP ---> XXX:XX for example] to be controlled and taxed by players. THIS WILL KILL ROAMING GANGS.
    - Modular structures are such a great idea

    MY FAVORITE: DEADSPACE POCKETS
    - PLEASE CCP, let us do this. I want more content that is in the middle of nowhere in space instead of around planets or moons, stuff I have to 'HUNT" for. (change dscan mechanics and this becomes much more feasbible)


    Well the assumption is that we would have public gates and then we would have built gates for newer released territory or as "secondary" pathways to the current system. So in the current world I think the tolling would be fine - but when the colonizing happens and we are building everything in new parts of space, then I can see where the issue arises.

    In regards to the hacking, I see it as less of a way to take over or destroy assets. But more so manipulate them. You build a whole network of gates, intelligence and you want that to yourself. Provide a reason to hack these modules and bypass restrictions placed forward by other players. This allows for a more dynamic interaction - allowing players to restrict and players to bypass. This wouldn't apply to other aspects such as actual docking rights or arrays.

    However, I do not believe in limiting the intelligence currently provided by the map. As many people use that not to get blasted to hell by gate camps.
    GeeShizzle MacCloud
    #125 - 2015-03-24 12:54:29 UTC  |  Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
    okay some constructive feedback...

    Quote:
    Observatory Arrays focus on intelligence gathering and disruption tools, like:

    • Tampering with Star Map filters

    the current starmap statistic filters are listed here: http://i.imgur.com/8eiLQls.png?2

    Of those the most widly used in the intel community are:
    Cyno fields
    ships destroyed in the last hour
    ships in space in the past 30 minutes

    In that order.
    The issue with these stats are that they're cached in set specific intervals so you're never sure that the data you're seeing refers to the time frame specified, as the language used hints at using you as a marker for a time frame, where in fact you're not.

    Other out of game websites store and analyse this kind of data to provide clearer more meaningful intelligence for the general Eve Public then the data in the client in its current form gives. So logically its the preferred choice.

    Due to the fact 'pilots in space in the last 30 minutes' is a dubious and inaccurate form of intel it is only rarely used as a tool to scout ships through hostile systems. Even then id say the majority of those end badly, and is why scouting yourself, or having someone scout +1 jump from you is the preferred method.

    Therefore it stands to reason that playing around with these metrics will have little impact on how people conduct themselves in game. They will still use out of game website that store correlate and nit together data to form solid intel, they wil still +1 scout themselves or others, etcetera.

    Quote:

    • D-scan disruption


    D-scan disruption is already a thing with the mobile scan inhibitor, but unfortunately the deployable itself is not dscan proof and therefore totally nullifies the entire point that the deployable is attempting to achieve - fixing this should be the easiest and best thing to do. Hiding a d-scan disruption in a service slot in a L size structure helps but allowing it to extend dscan disruption to the entire system i believe is too powerful, possibly AU range from the structure yes, but not system wide.

    i do however believe d-scan should be disrupted by line of sight celestial obstructions eg planets / moons to create tactical elements of being able to hide your ship behind the mass of a planet.

    Quote:

    • ship intelligence disruption

    by this i imagine you mean targeted ship intelligence eg cargo and ship scanners (including capacitor levels) and potentially killmail accuracy? its quite vague and to be honest, cargo and ship scanners are not often used unless you're delving into cap warfare or ganking on gates in highsec.

    i would like to see killmail accuracy be reduced significantly however. But not based on a service slot upgrade. Instead overall, so for example killmails to only show dropped items and aggressing pilots. Pod killmails stay the same as the body drops and the implants (although mangled beyond use) are still in the dead capsuleers head.

    far too much information is gleamed out of killmails these days and killmail hosting sites kile zkillboard are a go to point of intel on knowing with a fairly high probability what a hostiles ship may be fitted with. Alongside 3rd party tools like EFT a countering solution can be crafted fairly quickly by others, destroying the possibility of a good fight.

    Quote:

    • player tracking capabilities


    The current system for player tracking is awkward to get into, and to some extend does provide a barrier of entry to stop it from becoming overused, but because the mechanic has remained static for so long many player groups have gamed it to the point they have a plethora of players that can log an alt in and run a high level locator agent.

    The accuracy and speed is okay for tracking capitals and supercapitals but for pilots in subcaps its too slow, something i think is good for balance. However tieing a disruptive element to it based on the standings of the player being tracked would be an interesting and logical addition. asking an agent of gallente navy to find someone with higher standing to the gallente navy shouldnt return great results.

    Also installing locator agents in XL structures makes the whole process less convoluted in an area that to be honest the barrier of entry is gone regardless. Theres a lot of other nuances about this that can be explored, including but not limited to NPC pirate tag payment, faction standing for NPC pirate tags and vice versa, addition disruptive effects based on bribes...

    Quote:

    • being able to pinpoint cloak users


    This i believe is too far, or if done intelligently can maybe be on the very edge of being a balanced system. Personally ive lived and fought in sovereign nullsec for the majority of my eve life, i've recently been a victim of the dreaded afk cloaky camping mechanic and ive followed the discussion about afk camping in the forums. My honest opinion of cloaking is it is not broken or overpowered. the overpowered mechanic is an associated mechanic used in conjunction with cloaking that has given cloaking a bad rep. that mechanic is cynos. Specifically covert cynos, and the ability for black ops battleships to open bridges in the safety of the docking range of a station.

    the only way i can see a mechanic of cloaked ship detection being not overpowered is to have a moderately long spool up time (say 30 minutes) and a long cool down timer (say 1 hour and 30 minutes) where the structure or service creates a new probable signature in space that can be warped to once probed, and indicates the location of the cloaked ship when the structure or service was initiated, meaning the artificially created sig indicates where the cloaked ship was 30 minutes ago.
    if the ship is actually afk but traveling cloaked, sov holders can connect the dots so-to-speak and determine a direction the cloaked ship is heading.
    Ariete
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #126 - 2015-03-24 13:11:04 UTC
    The Gates and Observation Arrays do have some good ideas but i think some functions would fundamentally break game play in wormholes.

    Observation Arrays been able to pin point cloaked players. One of the reasons why wormhole exists is the fact that you can't see who is looking at you due to no local, been able to see cloaked ships would break this. This is one of the risk's of living in a wormhole and would unbalance this.

    Gates would also break a fundamental game play in wormholes. Using a Gate to control, make and collapse wormhole again takes a large amount of risk away from living in wormholes. The vast majority of wormhole players that i talked to at Fanfest DO NOT want this to happen.

    On to the good things

    Using Observation Arrays to boost D-Scan and Probe Scanning if you are with in range of of the array is a good idea. Using them so you can see intel about know space while been in wormhole space ie seeing where corp members are on you map is a real good idea.

    Using Gates to boost warp speeds, speed and agility in your system is quite useful, in some cases using them to slow things down would be nice.

    Pesadel0
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #127 - 2015-03-24 13:18:33 UTC
    So you dont want or are going away from the auto shoting AI of POS to favor of AI of sentry guns and NPC protecting Null assets?


    Does not compute.
    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #128 - 2015-03-24 13:44:39 UTC
    SpaceSaft wrote:

    On the other hand, I've had the problem on multiple occasions that random gank fleets, 5 ppl or less are just uncatchable by 50 ppl +, just by bouncing safe spots and waiting out the safe log off timer.

    It's also very, very wrong that the owning side can't force a fight eventually.


    No this is not wrong. If you would be able to force a fight, those 5 people can't come into null anymore. Because they would be guaranteed to be killed. And would you fly into guranteed death?
    This would stop small groups from being able to go into null sec. So you would have to join a larger group. And this exactly what is the problem now. That the larger coalitions rule everything.

    Beeing able to avoid being catched is ESSENTIAL for the Game if you want small groups to survive.

    People always say that corporations in EVE are dictatorships. But look at it that way: Everyone if free to leave the corporation. So you can choose your leadership by choosing the corporation. This forces the leadership to look after their members. Because they can always choose to leave which equals to vote someone out of the office.
    So corporations in eve are truly democracys.

    But if you have no choice other than staying in that corporation because you can't survive as a small group or single player you make the corporations true dictatorships. And noone likes to live in a dictatorship and you would rather leave the game.
    Ariete
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #129 - 2015-03-24 13:48:28 UTC
    Pesadel0 wrote:
    So you dont want or are going away from the auto shoting AI of POS to favor of AI of sentry guns and NPC protecting Null assets?


    Does not compute.


    The Devs are removing the AI for pos guns etc in the new structures. You will have to take control of the pos or defend them, use it or lose it.
    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #130 - 2015-03-24 13:51:09 UTC
    handige harrie wrote:
    These player built gates can be traversed by everyone without the need of payment, but they can be fitted with gateguns and other mods (like having a small gate cover a greater distance than it is supposed to cover with some mods and giving Jump fatigue because of that, while a proper size gate wouldn't give you any fatigue).


    This is a great idea - jump fatigue for too large jumps...

    handige harrie wrote:
    The Shotgun into another area of space idea is somewhat nice, as long as it is coupled to the same range of a JB or something. Else it would make moving around large distances really simple. If it's implemented like it's stated there it wayy to easily exploited for simple travelling opportunities. (Travelling from deep nullsec to empire, just blasting yourself near Jita or Amarr. Logging off for the night after your done with your business so you can shoot yourself back again the next day)


    But if you have player built gates you would need something like that to make travelling easier again. Beacue then player can create bottlenecks. So this would balance out.

    Maybe say that this shotgun type always causes fatigue and costs fuel. While fixed gates only cause fatigue if used the wrong way (too large distance) and don't cost any fuel - maybe they use their capactior for that. This would also explain the traffic control if too many try to jump through a gate. The gate is out of capacitor then.
    SpaceSaft
    Almost Dangerous
    Wolves Amongst Strangers
    #131 - 2015-03-24 13:58:02 UTC
    Sayod Physulem wrote:
    SpaceSaft wrote:
    It's also very, very wrong that the owning side can't force a fight eventually.


    No this is not wrong. If you would be able to force a fight, those 5 people can't come into null anymore. Because they would be guaranteed to be killed. And would you fly into guranteed death?

    Beeing able to avoid being catched is ESSENTIAL for the Game if you want small groups to survive.


    Do you even read my posts?

    I agree with this. I'm not advocating for a magical wonderweapon that blapps you the moment you enter a system.

    I'm advocating for something that if you sit in space you don't own for literally hours, you should be catchable. That doesn't even mean you're going to lose the fight, that doesn't mean you're going to lose your ship.

    It just means that if you're stupid enough to go to hostile space and stick around the hostile should have a chance to fight back.
    Cpt Patrick Archer
    I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE
    Blue Eyes and Exodia Toon Duelist Kingdom Duelers
    #132 - 2015-03-24 14:06:04 UTC
    I thought of a module while reading this, that could maybe add even more interesting gameplay. Some sort of hacking module that could steal / deny features of various structures.

    Maybe call it the 'Covert' Entosis Link.


    An idea could be to tie delayed local chat to the Observatory Array and let the hacking module effect this.


    I made my own post for this in the features and ideas subforum.
    GeeShizzle MacCloud
    #133 - 2015-03-24 14:22:04 UTC
    Cpt Patrick Archer wrote:
    I thought of a module while reading this, that could maybe add even more interesting gameplay. Some sort of hacking module that could steal / deny features of various structures.

    Maybe call it the 'Covert' Entosis Link.


    An idea could be to tie delayed local chat to the Observatory Array and let the hacking module effect this.


    I made my own post for this in the features and ideas subforum.


    i had a similar thought on this and your linked proposal is interesting, however somewhat overpowered to the hostiles (especially the temp offlining of a gate part)

    im always cautious of writing a big wall of text piece explaining ideas i have that would be cool in eve because of the discouraging aspects of reading a ton of stuff.

    constructive feedback is a different matter as i see that as directed purely at devs who do take the time to read the feedback threads thoroughly.

    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #134 - 2015-03-24 14:33:10 UTC
    SpaceSaft wrote:
    if you sit in space you don't own for literally hours, you should be catchable.


    You never used combat probes did you? And if you talk about covert ops ships - well that's what is special about them. They are able to sit in space and hide. Because of that they are COVERT ops.
    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #135 - 2015-03-24 14:44:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Sayod Physulem
    Banko Mato wrote:
    Sayod Physulem wrote:

    - ShortRange: You fit a lot of Scan resoultion modules and a cloak detecting module. You would be able to warp to everything within the starting 5 AU Range. Even cloaked ships!


    NO, this is an utterly terrible idea! No structure should provide a direct non-consensual warp in mechanic on arbitrary ships. This is what the damn combat probes and scanning skills are for after all!


    First it is not arbitrary. You can only warp to things that are in range of the array. And you can avoid a 5AU sphere. If you are in a larger ship than a frigate the sphere you would have to avoid would be larger (since your signature would be bigger). But you still can avoid it. Also if you warp to something cloaked you don't know where you warp to. You only know the signature size.

    But the real problem with your "argument" is, that it is not even an argument. Saying it should not be in a certain way is no reason just an opinion.

    Banko Mato wrote:
    Jason Dunham wrote:
    So if a structure is allowed to affect cloakies in system I suggest it operate by putting a timer on cloaks. The structure would emit interference that would build up, eventually breaking the cloak of any ship in system. Once that occurs, an active pilot can simply re-cloak, while those not actively playing would be vulnerable to probing down like they should be. This effect should show up as soon as you enter in system, letting any pilots know that they will have to pay attention to their cloak. I'd suggest that the timer be set to occupancy bonuses, with values of 60/30/15 minutes possible. This timer would start on cloak activation for each individual ship.


    Starting on from this much more feasible idea i would propose the following:

    Introduce Cloak Dissolution as a new mechanic that comes with every cloaking devise. Once a cloaking device gets active, it starts accumulating cloak dissolution (either visualize it as another circle around the module or as a "timer" icon in the upper left screen corner that starts to fill up) at a fixed base rate per minute. Once a critical value of cloak dissolution is reached, the cloak deactivates and starts its cooldown phase.

    The actual accumulation rate and critical limit can be influenced by ship bonus (like e.g. 33% less rate for covops or 100% more limit for recons, etc...) and by the cloaking skill (like -10% per level to make it meaningful).

    Interaction with the new OA structure could then work like active sonar pings that incur additional cloak dissolution on any ship either in range or system wide (maybe depending on size of the OA or rigs/services/whatsoever) and with a varying intervals and dissolution strength (again depending on configuration/size). However, there need to be certain constraints like say no overlapping areas of effect for non system wide OAs and at most one system wide OA with this "sonar" effect.
    Furthermore I imagine a few rough limits on the amount of time it takes such a system to decloak a freshly cloaked ship by means of cloak dissolution:

    • no combination of effects should be able to force a decloak on a covops at max level in less than 30 minutes
    • no covops ship should be able to stay cloaked longer than 3 hours at max level
    • regular ships without inherent cloaking bonuses should not be able to stay cloaked very long (maybe something below 1 hour)


    I think this mechanic is exactly what could solve the "afk cloaking" disaster. For every active pilot it should be trivially easy to watch his or her cloak dissolution level and either recloak after a forced decloak or simply reset the timer at a save or when in warp in deep space. An actual afk-cloaker on the other hand will be subject to being probed down as soon as his cloak dissolution level reaches the critical point and forces him to decloak. A win for everyone complaining about current cloak mechanics ;)


    I don't have a problem with current cloak mechanics and a lot of people don't. And since the people that don't like the mechanics are sov owners and ccp wants to nerf large sov coalitions ... If they are consequent they shouldn't help them to be more safe.

    My proposed system detects you if you get too close to an Observation array that can detect cloaked ships. So you can use these Observation arrays as protection. But a cloaked person could still sit in the system as long as they please as long as they stay away from your arrays.
    If you want to get into this zone you have to carfully deactivate them one after the other. If you succeed you have the advantage of suprise and can hot drop or gank someone. If you fail - you get detected and have to get out as fast as possible - since the OAs provide warp-ins (if they have enough scan res).
    Place OAs near your ratting space and you get a warning.
    The OAs could even warn everyone in the corporation about the detection and send a message. You wouldn't even have to check d-scan or local then.

    But as a cloaked person you still have the abilitys to circumvent these arrays. I don't know what your problem with that is...
    Rayzilla Zaraki
    Yin Jian Enterprises
    #136 - 2015-03-24 14:48:06 UTC
    I'm really pretty bummed seeing all the ideas of the OAs being able to emit a pulse to decloak or absolutely pinpoint a cloaked ship or even cause there to be some sort of time limit for cloaks. This is total easy button game play.

    These structures should assist active players, not do the work for passive players.

    CCP Ytterbium used the phrase "pinpoint cloaked users". I think this is the wrong direction. The phrase indicates a passive, easy button way to find cloakys.

    What the OAs should do relative to cloakys, is enhance activities like combat probing. With a network of OAs in place, cloakys can show up on combat scanners with tight resolution (no more than 8AU?). This lets the probing player know there's a cloaky and, if the cloaky is just sitting in one place, he'll be easily probed down. If he is active and moving around it will be a much harder endeavor to find him. This encourages active game play.

    I see this as a hybrid of submarine warfare and stealth technology. Submarine warfare has sonar pickets which can be picked up by submarines and possibly avoided - their sonar gives them and their strength away. A submarine actively pinging for another submarine finds the other sub but at the expense of giving away its presence and even location. In place of simply picking up the ping, the cloaky would have to have be checking D-Scan for combat probes. This might require a module or rig that increases D-Scan's distance or, a module for CovOps ships that picks up on the pings of the OAs and/or the combat probes (if within a certain radius, I'd think).

    For the stealth technology part, todays stealth fighters are designed so that radar systems are less effective against them. They essentially reduce the detection radius of the radar. A cloak can work similarly. A good cloak (high skill, good equipment, ship and rigs) could only be detectable within, say, 2AU of a properly equipped OA (as opposed to 20+AU for an uncloaked ship). This provides the ability for an active and smart cloaked player to fly between the pickets set up in a network of OAs. The approximate radius of the OAs would be known to the cloaky but the margin of error would be enough that mistakenly going into the radius is possible.

    The most I could see an OA (or network of OAs) doing is emitting a pulse that makes the cloaky show up visually and on overview (if on-grid) for a second or two. Give that one a looooong cool down. The idea would be that the hunter scans down the cloaky's area, warps on-grid (probably cloaked himself) and orders the OA(s) to emit the decloak pulse. The cloaky shimmers visually and pops up on overview for a second or two and re-cloaks on its own (the cloaky doesn't have to hit the cloak module or wait for the cool down since the pulse doesn't turn it off, just disrupts the cloaking field), if the hunting player is quick with a quick-locking ship, then he can lock and shoot (or whatever).

    If players want general protection of the system, they'd post OAs in a wide spread (again, just like scan probes set to, say, 32 to 64 AU)). If they want much better protection, they'd put a tighter spread around the asset they want to protect (<1 AU) thus making the job of actively scanning for cloakys in that area easier (but still give the clever cloaky a chance of getting through).

    Or something like that...

    Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.

    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #137 - 2015-03-24 14:58:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Sayod Physulem
    I should probably add - since we are talking about piloting around these OAs. We would need manual piloting on a solar system wide scale. So being able to warp to a point in the solar system you click.

    I mean since those arrays would pretty much act as colliders on grid. You need to avoid coming closer than 2km to something on grid and you would need to avoid coming closer to a OA closer than their scan range in the solar system. You really need manual piloting for that.

    EDIT: of course you still wouldn't be able to cancel warp
    GeeShizzle MacCloud
    #138 - 2015-03-24 15:01:32 UTC
    Sayod Physulem wrote:


    I don't have a problem with current cloak mechanics and a lot of people don't. And since the people that don't like the mechanics are sov owners and ccp wants to nerf large sov coalitions ... If you they are consequent they shouldn't help them to be more safe.



    im in a sov holding player org in a large coalition and have been subject to pizzas cloaky camping campaigns before and we have weathered it where others haven't.

    The problem is not the mechanics of cloaking, its the mechanics of covert cynos in conjunction with cloaks.

    ive never had issues with the cloak and its effects on a hostile in a system we have sov in, its the instant backup they can bring in in a split second, and the relative safety that backup enjoys from the undock of npc stations.
    Sayod Physulem
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #139 - 2015-03-24 15:27:56 UTC
    GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
    Sayod Physulem wrote:


    I don't have a problem with current cloak mechanics and a lot of people don't. And since the people that don't like the mechanics are sov owners and ccp wants to nerf large sov coalitions ... If you they are consequent they shouldn't help them to be more safe.



    im in a sov holding player org in a large coalition and have been subject to pizzas cloaky camping campaigns before and we have weathered it where others haven't.

    The problem is not the mechanics of cloaking, its the mechanics of covert cynos in conjunction with cloaks.

    ive never had issues with the cloak and its effects on a hostile in a system we have sov in, its the instant backup they can bring in in a split second, and the relative safety that backup enjoys from the undock of npc stations.


    Then maybe make it that you can't bridge near a station/strukture.
    But this has nothing to do with afk cloaking...
    Soldarius
    Dreddit
    Test Alliance Please Ignore
    #140 - 2015-03-24 15:30:39 UTC
    zar dada wrote:
    Can my corporation prevent personal/out of corp structures in a system? Using some kind of module? Or observatory structure?


    God no. That would be terrible.

    http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY