Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
651
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:43:00 -
[31] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Just log off. Log back in and recloak. That is the way it is supposed to work not being able to go away from the client for hours or nearly a day at a time. Says who?
Quote:This plan will address the issue. What issue?
Quote:Other issues that arise from its implementation are minor in comparison. You mean breaking cloaking completely is a GÇ£minor issueGÇ¥ compared to the complete non-issue you're trying to solve? How so?
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:50:00 -
[32] - Quote
what do you all say we go park a bunch of claoked Sb's out by whatever station she mines around and just taunt her while being all ghostie, thenj go afk for hours so she can't mine, since her main is obviously either a nullbear or someone who is just REALLY bad at fighting paper-thin stealth bombers....
honestly though, AFK cloakers are BALANCED, they CAN be found WITH EFFORT, and they cannot FIGHT BACK, most cloak ships have almost NO GOOD TANK and 1 less high slot, so even if they did engage you, if your competent at all they should be able to kill you
honestly i wonder if anyone whos ever been "attacked" by an AFK cloaker ever actually UNDOCKED and WENT ABOUT THEIOR BUSINESS.
cause you know what? if they are AFK then you can go about your business without being interered with, if they arent AFK and attack you THEY ARENT AFK CLOAKERS. learn to bait your targets and eliminate them, instead of coming on hear and whining about how its too ahrd to find them and you want an easy button.... |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 21:23:00 -
[33] - Quote
Thank you for revealing another reason to add risk to AFK cloaking.
Don't like what someone dares to mention or debates on the forum? Put an AFK cloaky in their system and get free effect against them. No need to organize a roam. No need to bring your fleet and take down the POS. Just go abuse the cloaking system and help make it that much harder for that person to debate in the future.
That is EXACTLY the reason why many people use alts these days to post. |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 23:53:00 -
[34] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:hehe, see what you did there? i did, you completely ignored the fact that cloaking requires a module, a HIGH SLOT module.
so even a cloaker IS NOT SAFE, if he TRIES anything or gets found, if he doesnt fix his **** quick, he is fighting with 1 less high-slot, and in alot of fights, that can make a difference
Nine out of ten times though the cloaker activates the micro warp drive fitted in his med slot to get out of scramble range. Then warp off to somewhere and activates the cloak. Safe and sound again.
A cloak should not be a personal station away from home. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
720
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 00:53:00 -
[35] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Don't like what someone dares to mention or debates on the forum? How can one have a debate with you, when you don't even want to address the reason for AFKing.
You just keep your head buried in the sand and we'll talk around you.
Lucien Visteen wrote:Nine out of ten times though the cloaker activates the micro warp drive fitted in his med slot to get out of scramble range. Then warp off to somewhere and activates the cloak. Safe and sound again. I hate to burst your bubble, but a warp scramble shuts off Micro Warp Drives. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good yarn.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 03:00:00 -
[36] - Quote
Hey, OP. You seem to have overlooked something.
Ingvar Angst wrote:Well this is a poorly thought out piece of crap of an idea.
You're completely nerfing wormhole intel gathering and changing the entire meta of wormholes by effectively mandating that people in wormholes constantly maintain a skynet of cloak detecting probes.
You failed to consider ripple effects. You attempted to fix a problem that's not really a problem, and in effect break a necessary tool in an entirely different section of the game. It's critical to be undetected and undetectable in wormholes for a variety of reasons. You really want to "fix" the non-issue with cloaked afk people?
Fix the fact that you can see cloaked ships in local in the first place, and do so in a balanced way.
You're breaking other areas of the game with something this stupid. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 03:22:00 -
[37] - Quote
The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 05:09:00 -
[38] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that.
Remove the incentive to AFK while docked or in a pos while you're at it.
It's only fair. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 06:43:00 -
[39] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that. Remove the incentive to AFK while docked or in a pos while you're at it. It's only fair.
Come put the POS into reinforced. Bubble up the station and destroy the players who eventually undock. Capture the station system and force the player to try to undock to escape or clone jump to do anything.
Many ways to counter those types. None to remove an AFK cloak contact that can hotdrop or attack at any time he chooses after a relaxing bath, a night out, or good sleep. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
728
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 07:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that. Remove the incentive to AFK while docked or in a pos while you're at it. It's only fair. Come put the POS into reinforced. Bubble up the station and destroy the players who eventually undock. Capture the station system and force the player to try to undock to escape or clone jump to do anything. Many ways to counter those types. None to remove an AFK cloak contact that can hotdrop or attack at any time he chooses after a relaxing bath, a night out, or good sleep. Those suggestions still don't remove or address the reason and incentive to AFK.
There is a thing called cause and effect. AFKing is the effect, you need to address the cause and so far, you're avoiding do that.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
671
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 08:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Thank you for revealing another reason to add risk to AFK cloaking. GÇ£AnotherGÇ¥? So that makes a total of one, then. Oh, and what was that reason? You didn't really say. So, I guess we're back to zero reasons.
Quote:Don't like what someone dares to mention or debates on the forum? I don't like when people claim to debate something and then refuse to provide any arguments and reasons, and can't answer even the simplest question.
Quote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much. Why is that needed? What is this GÇ£plagueGÇ¥ you're talking about? What is the problem you're trying to solve? GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 09:02:00 -
[42] - Quote
Mag's wrote:I hate to burst your bubble, but a warp scramble shuts off Micro Warp Drives. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good yarn.
Thats the tenth time, the one time where the agressor maybe decided to stay for just a little to long. Or forgot to align to a safe spot. Or was just a little less focused than usual.
Naria Kentaya wrote that you could find a cloaker through effort, yet afk cloaking takes no effort at all.
Also players seem to like the phrase risk versus reward. Yet no risk is placed in the hands of the afk cloaker. If you want to bait the cloaker out you have to place yourself at risk, and hope he/she bites.
My biggest concern with afk cloaking is that they dont use the cloak for its intended purpose. The players that afk cloak wants a quick gank, or an easy kill. As represented in this very thread and others for suggesting incetives for making defending players undock from the station. That right there is a problem.
I was under the impression that a cloakers main objective was to gather intel. Killing should be the least of your concerns. If you are concerned about kills then you are doing it wrong. And players I have encountered that is out to gather intel, don't stick around. Its the players that wants a kill that do. And the ones that stick around rarely flies a cov-ops since, as stated, it has no tank. Again, the cloak is not being used for its purpose. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
671
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 09:28:00 -
[43] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote:Naria Kentaya wrote that you could find a cloaker through effort, yet afk cloaking takes no effort at all. GǪand as it happens, AFK cloaking does nothing at all. So that seems like just about the right amount of effort.
Quote:Also players seem to like the phrase risk versus reward. Yet no risk is placed in the hands of the afk cloaker. GǪand no reward either. So the ratio is a rather fair 0:0.
Quote:If you want to bait the cloaker out you have to place yourself at risk, and hope he/she bites. GǪat which point we're no longer talking about AFK cloakers, and the risk vs. reward comes back into play: does he risk his ship against the reward of getting a kill against the risk of it being a trap against he reward of smacking you in local because your trap failed against the risk [etc].
Quote:My biggest concern with afk cloaking is that they dont use the cloak for its intended purpose. Staying hidden, you mean? Well, that's the thing: they can't use it for its intended purpose because there is this insanely broken intel tool called GÇ£localGÇ¥ that completely removes that possibility. So instead, they use if for a far more admirable purpose: to subvert that intel and make local less powerful.
As long as local exists in its current iteration, AFK cloaking needs to exist as well since it is the only counter to that intel tool.
Quote:The players that afk cloak wants a quick gank, or an easy kill. AFK cloaking is particularly worthless for quick ganks or easy kills since they require so much time to make people stop caring about that red/neutral in local and come out and play.
The purpose of cloaking is to remain hidden. What the purpose of remaining hidden is varies. Yes, it can be to gather intel. It can also be to travel. It can also be to set a trap. It can also be to just evade capture. It can also be to explore. Killing is most certainly a part of it unless it contradicts whatever purpose you've set up for yourself. Oh, and those who gather intel most certainly stick aroundGǪ otherwise, they will miss the intel they're there to gather. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Sir Substance
Tactical Knightmare
82
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:48:00 -
[44] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
You don't warp to the spot it finds as it is random.
You type words, but a coherent sentence they do not make. Or possibly a coherent idea they do not spring from. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:50:00 -
[45] - Quote
If they want to gather intel they are more then welcome to do so under my plan.
Just don't AFK for more than say 10-20 mins unless you are prepared for the risk someone will deploy my probe type. |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:55:00 -
[46] - Quote
A cov-ops ship using a cov-ops cloak can, and most certainly should use the cloak to slip by defences and report weaknesses in enemy defences. Since they can warp while staying cloaked. And move about with no penalty to speed.
And I would mutch rather have that player on my team than the one worried about a lone drake somewhere that he could kill.
If a cov-op with a cov-op cloak camps a system he is doing it wrong.
If the cloaker in the system is fielding anything other than a cov-ops, then if he decides to cloak he should not be able to probe scan or dscan, to reflect his no risk no reward state, dont you agree?
Since he clearly is inactive I mean, by being afk. |
COMM4NDER
Umbrella Holding Inc Umbrella Chemical Inc
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 11:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:If they want to gather intel they are more then welcome to do so under my plan.
Just don't AFK for more than say 10-20 mins unless you are prepared for the risk someone will deploy my probe type.
So what there should be a delay before using _your_ probes and if so how will it work will it only find people that been AFK for 10-20minutes or will it also find other people being cloaked?
Makes no sense to me and only way to balance it is to remove the cloaked guy from local in that way you wont be scared of his piwate picture made in incarna.
Cloak is for a reason and like other people stated, there is no reward for them when AFK cloaked. (they wont gather intel since they are not observing system since they are fapping to youtube/facebook pic or something else) hence no reward so there should not be a risk.
Also since he is not in local you wont see him or know that he is there so you will mind your own stuff.
AFK cloak can't hurt you and you cannot hurt him. If they hot drop you then he was not AFK and you can then also hurt them as they can hurt you.
Quote:Game balance is a concept in game design describing fairness or balance of power in a game between multiple players or strategic options. Each team or person would be equally matched in every aspect. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
178
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 12:07:00 -
[48] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that.
This is the point where you admit to having no idea what wormhole life is like and that you're only concerned about one little slice of the game where you inhabit.
Wormholes are not "plagued" by afk cloaking at all. You know what? If someone's in your hole cloaked and afk you don't know it. Period. As a matter of fact, they're much less of a threat than the person in your hole cloaked that's actually at the keyboard. Here's the kicker... you don't know they're there either!
And it's perfectly fine like that.
You see, things are different in wormholes. We've learned to be alert. We use the tools at our disposal to do what we can to minimize risk... dscan, probes, etc., and we get out and function. Hell, if we suspect someone is in the hole cloaked that's when it gets fun... what can we do to bait him out? Now, a big part of why it's not such a big deal in a hole is the lack of the cyno thing. We know we're not suddenly going to have supers hot-dropped on our heads. That's why there should be considered the changes I recommended for how cloaked ships interact with local and with the cyno.
You're idea is flat out stupid however. It should NEVER be possible to know a cloaked person is in your hole for sure. If someone sneaks in while you're offlline and sits cloaked, that's their advantage, good job. They have carte blanche to fly around and scout things out, see if you're worth trying to gank or even prepare an op for. It's up to the inhabitants to be alert, notice if the cloaked guy makes a mistake or gives himself away, etc. To be able to log in and drop a probe that tells me whether or not there are cloaked bad guys in the hole? Boolsheet. Absolute boolsheet. You're taking away a critical part of wormhole life and wormhole survival. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
178
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 12:11:00 -
[49] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote: I was under the impression that a cloakers main objective was to gather intel. Killing should be the least of your concerns. If you are concerned about kills then you are doing it wrong. And players I have encountered that is out to gather intel, don't stick around. Its the players that wants a kill that do. And the ones that stick around rarely flies a cov-ops since, as stated, it has no tank. Again, the cloak is not being used for its purpose.
Horsecrap. Gatherin intel in preparations for an op can mean you have a cloaked vessel in there watching the enemy for days or weeks while cloaked up off the pos. It's the difference between a successful op and not knowing what you're getting in to. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Lianail Deninard
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 15:03:00 -
[50] - Quote
Sorry, I do not agree with this solution. It reworks some of the major mechanics and is not necessary. Here is an option that I developed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=23411 . I don't care whether it "needs" to be done for balance or not, that is irrelevant to the conversation. -á Reward law abiding citizens. We should never promote sociopathic behavior as a primary mode of interaction.-á There are-áreasons for Good people to fight, such as defending their nation. Encourage people to become heros, not villians. -á If you agree with an idea, Like it. |
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
179
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 15:06:00 -
[51] - Quote
Lianail Deninard wrote:Sorry, I do not agree with this solution. It reworks some of the major mechanics and is not necessary. Here is an option that I developed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=23411 . I don't care whether it "needs" to be done for balance or not, that is irrelevant to the conversation.
Equally bad. You're not addressing the real problem. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 15:15:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Lucien Visteen wrote: I was under the impression that a cloakers main objective was to gather intel. Killing should be the least of your concerns. If you are concerned about kills then you are doing it wrong. And players I have encountered that is out to gather intel, don't stick around. Its the players that wants a kill that do. And the ones that stick around rarely flies a cov-ops since, as stated, it has no tank. Again, the cloak is not being used for its purpose.
Horsecrap. Gatherin intel in preparations for an op can mean you have a cloaked vessel in there watching the enemy for days or weeks while cloaked up off the pos. It's the difference between a successful op and not knowing what you're getting in to.
I'm not talking about intel gathering in WH's here. That is done in a completely different manner cause of system mechanics. Im talking about intel gathering in 0.0, because of system mechanics.
In a cov-op, with a cov-op cloak, you can get quite a lot of info without being detected. From number of people in system to the reaction of said individuals. A cov-op generally have no tank, nor dps and need to keep a general low profile when sniffing about. Get what you need, and get out. That is how its usually been in my encounters of this kind, and that is not a problem. Cloak works as intended.
The problem arises when players uses ships not intended for cov-ops roles. That is where I think the system is wrong. Since you can still get plenty of info while staying cloaked. Dscan and probe scanning can be done even while you are cloaked, and this messes up with the no risk no reward. Since it really is no risk staying cloaked in a safe spot somewhere. Then you should not get any reward either, i.e. scanning information. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:01:00 -
[53] - Quote
Quote:For those who are confused at this point. Lets take a random scenario in the game. A player jumps into the system, finds a safespot and cloaks. Under current game mechanics this player is now effectively invincible in place. Example in image below.
Hogwash.. the player can be declocked by anyone who gets close enough.. if the player is in a safe spot he can do nothing in game while cloaked. What is it that you imagine that you are trying to balance cloaking with? because from where I sit you are trying to unbalance it. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:08:00 -
[54] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Lucien Visteen wrote: I was under the impression that a cloakers main objective was to gather intel. Killing should be the least of your concerns. If you are concerned about kills then you are doing it wrong. And players I have encountered that is out to gather intel, don't stick around. Its the players that wants a kill that do. And the ones that stick around rarely flies a cov-ops since, as stated, it has no tank. Again, the cloak is not being used for its purpose.
Horsecrap. Gatherin intel in preparations for an op can mean you have a cloaked vessel in there watching the enemy for days or weeks while cloaked up off the pos. It's the difference between a successful op and not knowing what you're getting in to. I'm not talking about intel gathering in WH's here. That is done in a completely different manner cause of system mechanics. Im talking about intel gathering in 0.0, because of system mechanics. In a cov-op, with a cov-op cloak, you can get quite a lot of info without being detected. From number of people in system to the reaction of said individuals. A cov-op generally have no tank, nor dps and need to keep a general low profile when sniffing about. Get what you need, and get out. That is how its usually been in my encounters of this kind, and that is not a problem. Cloak works as intended. The problem arises when players uses ships not intended for cov-ops roles. That is where I think the system is wrong. Since you can still get plenty of info while staying cloaked. Dscan and probe scanning can be done even while you are cloaked, and this messes up with the no risk no reward. Since it really is no risk staying cloaked in a safe spot somewhere. Then you should not get any reward either, i.e. scanning information.
There's your problem. You need to take all areas that would be affected into account. If you come up with a means to detect cloaked ships, there's other aspects of the game you break beyond your little garden of love in null sec. In wormholes, covops ships will often sit cloaked for hours, days, weeks even gatherin intel. They need to be completely undetected and undetectable to do their jobs. You break that. Therefore your idea fails. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
37
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:16:00 -
[55] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:The whole idea is removing the incentive to AFK. That includes wormholes which are plagued by the practice just as much.
Edit: Also remember that it is a random point. There is no way you can maintain an umbrella over just the area of OPs and expect to uncloak the person. Also the huge scan times would prevent that. Remove the incentive to AFK while docked or in a pos while you're at it. It's only fair. Come put the POS into reinforced. Bubble up the station and destroy the players who eventually undock. Capture the station system and force the player to try to undock to escape or clone jump to do anything. Many ways to counter those types. None to remove an AFK cloak contact that can hotdrop or attack at any time he chooses after a relaxing bath, a night out, or good sleep.
None of those are counters. RFing a pos takes a fleet, two days and some co-ordination. Taking a station takes a week anfd still doen't force the guy to undock. bubbling an undock does not let me kill the guys who don't come out to play.
You want to be able to kill AFK cloakers solo, inside of one hour. I want to be able to kill anyone who AFK docks or idles AFK in a pos, solo, within one hour. It's only fair. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
673
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:21:00 -
[56] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote:I'm not talking about intel gathering in WH's here. That is done in a completely different manner cause of system mechanics. Im talking about intel gathering in 0.0, because of system mechanics. GǪand you're breaking that intel gathering with your proposal.
Quote:In a cov-op, with a cov-op cloak, you can get quite a lot of info without being detected. No you can't, for the simple reason that you are always detected. Local ensures this.
Quote:Get what you need, and get out. GǪand with your proposal, that is no longer possible because you want to enforce strict limits to how much you are allowed to GǣneedGǥ. All for no sufficiently explained reason.
Quote:The problem arises when players uses ships not intended for cov-ops roles. Such asGǪ?
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:24:00 -
[57] - Quote
Cloaking removes you from local chat, you cant cower inside of your station at a guy that's afk in your system if you don't know hes there in the first place. I love the the smell of victory in the morning. It smells like... Blood, vomit and burning flesh. |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:42:00 -
[58] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lucien Visteen wrote:I'm not talking about intel gathering in WH's here. That is done in a completely different manner cause of system mechanics. Im talking about intel gathering in 0.0, because of system mechanics. GǪand you're breaking that intel gathering with your proposal. Quote:In a cov-op, with a cov-op cloak, you can get quite a lot of info without being detected. No you can't, for the simple reason that you are always detected. Local ensures this. Quote:Get what you need, and get out. GǪand with your proposal, that is no longer possible because you want to enforce strict limits to how much you are allowed to GǣneedGǥ. All for no sufficiently explained reason. Quote:The problem arises when players uses ships not intended for cov-ops roles. Such asGǪ?
I havent proposed anything yet thou.
And Ingvar, there is a rather easy way to exclude WH if you are so worried about it.
Example: Module Something is doing something to something.
Warning! This module will not work outside known space.
Ninja Edit:
To answer your question Tippia. Scanning for possible gank sites while being safe inside enemy systems. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:48:00 -
[59] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote: I havent proposed anything yet thou.
And Ingvar, there is a rather easy way to exclude WH if you are so worried about it.
Example: Module Something is doing something to something.
Warning! This module will not work outside known space.
That's flat out clunky and hard to explain from a lore or immersion standpoint.
There's a better way. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
673
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:55:00 -
[60] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote:To answer your question Tippia. Scanning for possible gank sites while being safe inside enemy systems. My only question was Gǣ[the problem arises when players uses ships not intended for cov-ops roles] such asGǪ?Gǥ so I presume this is what you mean?
SoGǪ how is does that fall outside of the intended use of cloaks or non-covops ships? GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |