Player Features and Ideas Discussion

While I am not totally against your Idea. Would you agree to constellation chat as a sort of Intel Channel then as removing local would make Intel completely broken. It wouldn't tell you what system the cloaked person is in but would let people know there are people about. Also if you want it so you don't know who is in your system would you agree that people holding sov space should be able to put up permanent defenses up. Think of it like trying ot sneak through the English Channel in WW2 it had a ton of sonar nets and other defenses in place. I think this would be the only fair compromise so it would make being a stealth ship more challenging but also more rewarding. I am back and forth on the idea of letting black ops use covert cloaks. It makes sense but at the same time would make them OP in my opinion. I would like to fix the ship from being just a fat cyno ship into something more useful as the name implies that it is supposed to work behind enemy lines but it really doesn't do this atm. I do agree that all cloaking ships should have 0 second delay on lock time let recons be the ship they are meant to be.

I would suggest a two pronged approach to the cloaking VS local issue, since modifying one without the other would leave it unbalanced.
(Keep in mind, both are effectively broken as far as many players are concerned, but they are broken in a way that balances each other in a crude way)

Remove cloaked pilots from local. Cloak goes on, local stops listing. Cloak goes off, local shows them. In some cases, it will make their names flash in and out, which would draw attention to them for some.

Make D-Scan a toggle, so that it constantly updates about every 2 seconds or less, and give it decent range to react with. Also, if a cloaked ship gets in range of D-Scan this way, it gets reported as a cloaked item, with no other information or pilot standings.
Most ratters and miners would be able to safe up based on D-Scan warnings, assuming they were paying attention.
(It would make sense to have a check box to activate a "Cloak Alarm", in the event D-Scan detected a cloaked object, giving the pilot an alarm sound to catch their attention)

I like this part, and think it should be in the game even if the first part is not.

It would be cool in WH's, and players could become a lot more self reliant and ignore the so called AFK Cloaking issue.
(Seriously? As long as they are actually AFK who cares! I am worried about the attentive and alert cloaking pilot a whole lot more...)

Agreed, my theory needs both sides for balance.

Like it except that I think the time between cycles should depend on the angle of the scan, shorter the angle the shorter the scan time. 360 should update about every 8-10 seconds while anything 30 and below should update everysecond. Also other means, beyond d-scan, should be made to actively gather intel on active targets. My idea is that activity on the part of the cloaker weakens his cloaking field and may allow him to be located with some cat and mouse tactics by the defenders. There should be nothing in the form of probes that locate cloaked ships in safe spots as it defeats the purpose of cloaking.

Nullbears do nothing but whine when they cannot rat in peace. Lowsec and W-space are the most dangerous places in eve unfortunately.

AFK Cloaking/Cyno Balancing

OK, the basic issue is not that cloaking as a mechanic is 'broken',
it's not that having a pilot in a system who cannot be 'found' is scary;

It is the use of cloaking AND cyno together that is the core issue people have with AFK Cloaking. A pilot in a cloaked ship at a well made safespot is COMPLETELY SAFE from attack by defending pilots until he decides to uncloak. If he then uses a cyno, the ships that come in, can avoid using defendable gates or closable wormholes in order to enter and leave the system anywhere in that system... this is, of course, the EVE famous "hotdrop". When the cloaky/cyno pilot hotdrops a PvP fleet onto PvE ships or mining shps, the aggressors have an unbalanced advantage.

OK, so change the cloak & cyno mechanic so that NO SHIP IN EVE CAN FIT A CLOAK AND A CYNO AT THE SAME TIME.

This is the simplest solution... CPU needs for a cloak are extreme and require a special ship type... ok, a slight change to the Cynosaural Field Generator module and if any cloak is fitted, active or not, a cyno CANNOT ever have enough CPU to be onlined even with a full set of CPU mods in the low slots.

Cloaks and cloaking is totally unaffected in W-space.

In null, AFK Cloakers are not affected in thier intel gathering and safety while cloaked... they just can't be the focal point of an indefensable incursion by a fleet into a system anymoar.

You want to light off a cyno? Have your cloaky make a BM or sit on the desired warp in point and, in order for you to get the 'reward' of a hotdrop, your cyno ship has to 'risk' the run through the gate/hole then the run to the cloaky or BM and THEN you can light off your cyno and make with the violencing of boats... and the people in the system have a chance to organize a response.... fight back or dock up. Don't like em docking up? Fine... keep your fleet in there and you can 'risk' that to carry out your Income Denial Op instead of ONE lone AFK char... Risk = Reward, = Balance.

Who knows? Mebbe the ability of the defenders to actuallly fight back in PvP fitted ships instead of being hotdropped in PvE ships might just stir up a response and get you some PvP... only on moar balanced terms for all....

You may now rage and cry about how unfair this would be... how I want to nerf your gameplay... how I suc at life because I want to fight back inna PvP fit ship.

Possible solution to the cyno hotdrop issue is to limit the amount or mass of ships that can be bridged onto a single cyno.

On topic: cloaks need to be detectable but not easily, and especially not easily at gates (detectable does not necessarily mean findable, but some sort of warning is needed). Local needs to lose its current 100% perfect intel, and dscan needs improving a heck of a lot. Most importantly though, these things need to happen at the same time.

Personally my only issue with Hotdrops is in its effect of enhancing the power having more numbers. Cloaks should primarily be for the few to overcome the many. Being able to use a cov cyno to get behind enemy lines is a good feature. Players being able to drop big fleets and even caps right on top of of small gangs is not.

There's probably lots of ways it could be made better, I still like my idea of being able to jam the lighting of a cyno beacon with warp scrams/disruptors. In regard to cloakers and cynos, making new CovOps ships or variants of existing ships that can't fit a cyno but instead gain greater capabilities to operate as solo threats would another means of reducing the threat of hotdrops, while giving solo and small gang cloakies a much deserved boost.

As to removing Local Chat Intel, it's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned even without any other changes removing it would be a very good thing. Not that I'm against a reasonable means of cloak detection, I just don't see it as something that is required to remove Local.

No I don't think that's the best path. Local Intel should be removed entirely for everyone regardless what kind of ship they're flying. CovOps ships shouldn't be the only ones able to avoid the very badly designed Local Chat mechanics, the whole thing just needs to be scraped.