These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

[Proposal] - Probing cloaked ships

Author
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-01-09 00:57:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
There should be a way to fight cloaked ships other then waiting all day long for it to uncloak... cloaking totally spoils the game the way it is, as it is often used to evade fights and grief... Also it is really boring to hunt one of them, since they can only be killed if the cloaked pilot is inexperienced and have a bad timing.

Proposal: Cloaked ships should be detected by some sort of combat scanner probes. this way there would be a real possibility to uncloak it and there would be more real PVP and less griefers...

Obs: There should be a Warning for the cloaked ship every time it gets detected by a prober ( Like: "A scanner probe has locked X.XX% on your position" warning or some graphical thing.)

This way the game should be fair! ( cloak should make invisible. not invincible.)

EDIT:

Coming soon!!

CSM_CCP_Mettings_7-9_12_2011.pdf wrote:

Cloack Hunters: CCP brought up the possibility of a future cloak-hunting ship or mechanics as a hypothetival; this was described as 'more like finding a submarine than pulling a blanket off' a cloaked ship. the CSM was cautiously positive about the idea of a cloak-hunting vessel of some kind.


I will definitly fly one of those!
Goose99
#2 - 2012-01-09 01:57:57 UTC
No.

And bring back unprobable.Cool
Drake Draconis
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2012-01-09 02:01:05 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
It is simple... There should be a way to fight cloaked ships other then waiting all day long for it to uncloak... cloaking totally spoils the game the way it is...

Cloaked ships should be detected by combat scanner probes. this way there would be a real possibility to uncloak it and there would be more real PVP and less greefers...

Although different cloaking modules should have different Signature reduction bonuses while active for balance reasons...

Prototype Cloaking Device I - small signature reduction
Improved Cloaking Device II - bigger signature reduction
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II - small/medium signature reduction

This way the game should be fair! ( cloak should make invisible. not invincible.)


You spoil the game with your idea...what do you suggest we do about it?

================ STOP THE EVEMAIL SPAM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152

Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#4 - 2012-01-09 02:35:01 UTC
Obvious trolling thread. His opinion is the exact opposite as indicated here

Why do people do this?
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
CraftyCroc
Fraternity Alliance Please Ignore
#5 - 2012-01-12 00:33:39 UTC
cloak means cloak.

not probe me to find me

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2012-01-12 02:50:09 UTC
How is doing nothing griefing?
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#7 - 2012-01-12 03:12:45 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
How is doing nothing griefing?


Funny, I never noticed that bit. Even using cloakig to gather intel and spy doesn't qualify as griefing; it's just proper use of game mechanics.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-01-12 16:40:09 UTC
The fact is that CCP loses allot of subscriptions because of that...

It doesn't matter you take a system and have the sov of it, Some ships can enter it and stays cloaked for Days while you are unable to do anything ( Fighting back, Mining, Rating anything ).. While this is happening all industrial players stop playing... they wont put their Hulks in the field to get ganked... So the game become boring for them, and as this happens frequently and there is nothing that can be done, they stop playing.... the price of minerals rise... the price of all ships and modules rise... it get more difficult to replace a ship.... and then we get less pew pew... This way cooling down the game, reducing its effective fun...

About the sand box, I'm not a carebeer, I lived on WH-Space, I took down some POS and territories, I mined on Hi-sec Null-sec and Low-sec, I did all forms of PI exploration (WH, Hi-sec processing, Null-sec, Low sec) I already participated on Roamings on Low-sec, also cloaked roaming. Also I can fly all sorts of cloaked ships including Industrial and T3... Also I usually do recon operations and scout operations probing the way, for Known space navigation and Wormhole navigation... Also I had produced for T1, T2, T3, and capital market. So, everyone have a different experience playing EVE, and my fun in this game is to explore all aspects of the game. What I can say is that the game is not only PVP, it needs an industrial base, and everyone have its role, THIS IS A SANDBOX.

So i'm just saying, a way to fight cloaked ships is good not to me nor to you, but to the game!
TrollFace TrololMcFluf
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2012-01-12 16:51:06 UTC
How is sitting cloaked in a system full of people to kill griefing.

It seems like a good way to shut down a alliance to me to hamper your efforts and isk making time.

Its your own fault that they are there in the first place with your failed system security and if your too scared to go about your normal buiss while they are there then whos fault is that.

NO NO BUFF TO NULLSEC CAREBEARS
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#10 - 2012-01-12 19:28:58 UTC
AFK cloaking and hot drops give so little risk to the attacker for how effective it is. It needs a nerf.

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544

Drake Draconis
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2012-01-12 19:33:05 UTC
Wolodymyr wrote:
AFK cloaking and hot drops give so not fair to the victim for how effective it is. It needs a nerf.


Fix'd

================ STOP THE EVEMAIL SPAM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152

FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#12 - 2012-01-12 19:50:45 UTC
There is NO POINT in cloaked ships if they can be scanned down.

Either advocate for the removal of cloaks entirely, or stop whining.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#13 - 2012-01-12 21:50:14 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
The fact is that CCP loses allot of subscriptions because of that...


CCP will lose a lot of subscriptions as well as credibility if they implement any of your horrible ideas on cloaking.
War Hor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#14 - 2012-01-13 05:20:44 UTC
The idea of probing a cloaked ship kind of defeats the purpose of a cloak. I do think there needs to be a counter to the cloaked system setters, but I don't think CCP should break it like that. Maybe something to the effect of while active, the cloaked ship won't regenerate cap, and the cloak it self takes 2% of your max cap every 60 seconds. This will give 50 minutes of cloaked time if you cloak with 100% cap. 50 minutes is more then enough time to find a noob in a hulk, and stop the annoyance of people that cloak, warp to a safe, align to nothing, and go to bed.

To the whole loosing players thing, there's 500 systems in this game, and 1,000's of ways to play. GET THE F*** OVER IT!
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
#15 - 2012-01-13 10:27:13 UTC
No.

Read the 5 million threads before this one as to why not.

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2012-01-13 11:33:14 UTC
I'm going to copy/paste this from the previous thread:

Here's what'll happen:

The cloakers will whine about how nullsec is safe, and how afk cloaking is a counter to that.
Then wormholers will come in and whine about how it breaks wormholes.
Then they'll suggest either no local, delayed local or removing cloaked ships from local.
Then I'll point out how that completely breaks the risk/reward ratio of current nullsec.
Then some arguing back and forth'll ensue, with lots of namecalling.
Then, nothing will come of it.

There, I just saved you maggots 15 pages of drivel.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Noisrevbus
#17 - 2012-01-13 15:22:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Lord Zim wrote:

Then I'll point out how that completely breaks the risk/reward ratio of current nullsec.


This is where you go wrong.

What kind of risk involved is there now? Virtually none. That is why we have an alt- and bot infestation well above any past proportions. It's also why we have less actors in 0.0 politics and more useless fronts (whole corporations or alliances devoted to seed spies, hold ISK-alts and usurp newer or more casual players for tax) than ever. It's the ease of controlling it thanks to poor mechanics - and with this thread the OP suggest we give that passive AFK-empire gameplay more tools. I understand it's a paradox that AFK-cloakers counteract AFK-empires, but that's how the cookie crumbles. The best way to deal with AFK-cloakers is to nerf AFK-empires, and encourage griefing.

When was the last time you took a loss in an anomaly or static, from invading skirmishers? That has never happened, you say?! Do you think the reason for that is that you are truly so awesome, or because there is simply such little risk involved?

Don't presume that 0.0 lack rewards, just because the vast majority of those rewards go toward RMT or stockpiling Supers instead of grunt populace.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2012-01-15 21:25:39 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:

Then I'll point out how that completely breaks the risk/reward ratio of current nullsec.


This is where you go wrong.

Nope.

Noisrevbus wrote:
What kind of risk involved is there now? Virtually none.

That's funny. So there's no such thing as awoxers, never anyone getting ganked because they didn't pay attention for a few minutes or seconds, etc. I can undock and go afk for hours upon hours and expect to come back to a ship instead of a pod in a station?

Right.
Noisrevbus wrote:
When was the last time you took a loss in an anomaly or static, from invading skirmishers? That has never happened, you say?! Do you think the reason for that is that you are truly so awesome, or because there is simply such little risk involved?

The last time I took a loss while ratting was when I was in delve. Incidentally, that was also one of the last times I ratted, because it's much more profitable/less stressful to do a vast majority of things in hisec rather than in nullsec.

Noisrevbus wrote:
Don't presume that 0.0 lack rewards, just because the vast majority of those rewards go toward RMT or stockpiling Supers instead of grunt populace.

Who's presuming?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-01-17 17:49:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Lord Zim wrote:
I'm going to copy/paste this from the previous thread:

Here's what'll happen:

The cloakers will whine about how nullsec is safe, and how afk cloaking is a counter to that.
Then wormholers will come in and whine about how it breaks wormholes.
Then they'll suggest either no local, delayed local or removing cloaked ships from local.
Then I'll point out how that completely breaks the risk/reward ratio of current nullsec.
Then some arguing back and forth'll ensue, with lots of namecalling.
Then, nothing will come of it.

There, I just saved you maggots 15 pages of drivel.


Maybe, but there are someone that ends up hearing us and thinking about it!

CSM_CCP_Mettings_7-9_12_2011.pdf wrote:

Cloack Hunters: CCP brought up the possibility of a future cloak-hunting ship or mechanics as a hypothetival; this was described as 'more like finding a submarine than pulling a blanket off' a cloaked ship. the CSM was cautiously positive about the idea of a cloak-hunting vessel of some kind.


I will definitly fly one of those!
Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-01-18 18:20:25 UTC
Read the CSM minutes that were posted.

CCP is looking at a dedicated ship that will be able to find cloaky ships. Now won't that be fun? Twisted
123Next page