|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1908
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 14:41:15 -
[1] - Quote
If they ever decide to touch this topic, they won't do it without revamping all aspects of Intel, especially free Intel provided by starmap and API data. Otherwise it's always going to remain a binary system with no room for lack of Intel or possible bad Intel. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1911
|
Posted - 2015.01.12 02:51:13 -
[2] - Quote
Bullet Therapist wrote:Answer: Eggs evolved long (a few hundred million years) before chickens. This is a smart man.
E: I'm shamelessly stealing this by the way. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1925
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 00:44:22 -
[3] - Quote
Justa Hunni wrote:Bullet Therapist wrote: If you've got cloaky eyes in a system, and you've use him before, there's a good chance I know if you're going to use him or not. If I've seen a cloaker make a move one time, I've watch listed, cataloged, and made notes on every other person on the killmail they produce, if any. By correlating this information with killboard histories, I (or potentially any player) am able to discern, with a resonable chance of success, whether that character is active or not. It's hard to have a psychological effect if the people your trying to affect know that you're impotentently sitting afk.
I think you have less of a grasp on the game mechanics than you claim. Dealing with afk cloakers and establishing system security, for those whom are interested, is a mixture of activities that requires correlating details into a bigger picture with the intent of understanding the risk posed by a situation. Cloakers are less threatening than most of the people here believe because we have the tools to understand when they're going to be active or not when they've been used. The problem is intel, more specifically, the quality of the intel relative to the risk that cloakers place themselves in.
Ok so your problem isn't with AFK cloaking it is with cloaking in general. Glad we could clear that up. If I am cloaked and AFK I'm not providing intel on anything. I'm more likely getting something to eat or dealing with spouse aggro. So your ***** is that I can cloak and report on you and you can't stop me (at least this appears to be what you're complaining about). Well since this is an AFK cloaking thread, maybe you should more your "I hate cloaking" comments to another one Are you really trying to harp on the semantics? I could give the example of the Intel twitch stream and my amazing wireless keyboard I walk around the house with.
Or you could accept that the issue is broad and not limited to the number of characters you can fit in a title. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1926
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 01:19:13 -
[4] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Bullet Therapist wrote:The issue that I have is that it is a powerful tool that has very few drawbacks right now and that a player can remain in a ship, cloaked in space indefinitely.
Its the only counter to the insta intel that is local. Aside from jump portals. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1926
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 01:42:50 -
[5] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote:baltec1 wrote:Bullet Therapist wrote:The issue that I have is that it is a powerful tool that has very few drawbacks right now and that a player can remain in a ship, cloaked in space indefinitely.
Its the only counter to the insta intel that is local. Aside from jump portals. They require something to be in local to jump to, the second their cyno ship enters local the are seen. AFK cloaking is the only thing that can counter local intel. kill boards show, people have found a way around it without AFK cloaking. Not that I wouldn't love to see it gone, but definitely not as a solo change. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1926
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 02:09:48 -
[6] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Bullet Therapist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Bullet Therapist wrote:The issue that I have is that it is a powerful tool that has very few drawbacks right now and that a player can remain in a ship, cloaked in space indefinitely.
Its the only counter to the insta intel that is local. Or interceptors, other fast frigates, interdictors, logoffs, or awox alts. It's not the only counter, it's a counter, and again, for the thousandth time, I'm not asking for it to be removed, or even that local not be changed. The argument here is that local isn't perfect and that cloaking should have a limiting factor. All of those ships and tactics show up in local the instant they enter the system. They are not a counter to it. AFK cloaking is the only thing that can mess with this instant intel. If your using the literal sense, then absolutely nothing that is legal is a counter since you can't remove yourself from local. AFK cloaking would be a counter to something the other pilots assess from that Intel. The Intel hasn't been fooled or changed. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1926
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 02:25:03 -
[7] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote: If your using the literal sense, then absolutely nothing that is legal is a counter since you can't remove yourself from local. AFK cloaking would be a counter to something the other pilots assess from that Intel. The Intel hasn't been fooled or changed.
If you have something sitting in local doing nothing for hours to days at a time thats defeating the intel. Nothing that local does tells you that he is inactive. The assumption as to whether or not the pilot is active or inactive is exactly that. An assumption. You can choose to treat him as AFK or as active. Local doesn't give you that. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1926
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 02:36:48 -
[8] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote: If your using the literal sense, then absolutely nothing that is legal is a counter since you can't remove yourself from local. AFK cloaking would be a counter to something the other pilots assess from that Intel. The Intel hasn't been fooled or changed.
If you have something sitting in local doing nothing for hours to days at a time thats defeating the intel. Nothing that local does tells you that he is inactive. The assumption as to whether or not the pilot is active or inactive is exactly that. An assumption. You can choose to treat him as AFK or as active. Local doesn't give you that. Nevertheless this is the only thing we have that can beat local intel. That's the thing, it can't beat it. You are essentially working against the intelligence of the other person. Which is how most other ways around it work. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1929
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 03:36:55 -
[9] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: However, it is vexing that he can just sit there in perfect safety, watching, waiting and we can do nothing to kick him out of our home. He is in perfect control of when an engagement happens.
The face of entitlement, ladies and gentlemen. It is not "your home". EVE belongs to everyone, not just the people who want to farm the AI all day long. I'm sorry, what? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1934
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 17:27:57 -
[10] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Haywoud Jablomi wrote:Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor. You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure. I don't think you realize the implications of what your saying. Or how ridiculous they are. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1935
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 18:01:13 -
[11] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Rowells wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Haywoud Jablomi wrote:Jenn I am cool with the tactics you have suggested, however those are all defensive tactics. I am asking for a way to take a more proactive stance against a potential agressor. You can. Defend your system. They have to come in some kind of way, either wormhole or gate. Your failure to defend your entry points is no reason for CCP to give you new stuff to compensate for your failure. I don't think you realize the implications of what your saying. Or how ridiculous they are. I've lived all over null sec (starting in Syndicate in 2008 and Omist later than year). I rtend to advocate for dead end systems being ratting systems in whatever alliance I am in because if you can get a guy called out in intel coming you way, that gives you a chance to get an alt into a sabre and get the gate bubbled before they arrive. Then it's just a decloaking game (or was before ceptors became immune to bubbles, but ceptors have a decloaking delay unlike bombers, it's the bombers and recons you REALLY want to catch before they cloak in your system). Wormholes have complicated this but you can anchor a bubble on a wormhole just as easy. Some of us actually try to play the game before we run to mommie (ccp) to fix it for us. So you think having to camp a gate for 23/7 is a valid tactic to keep someone out? And simply finding a single moment when the system is vulnerable means you wont have to risk anything beyond that?
Beyond travelling, you dont risk anything, but gain quite a bit of advantage. Depending on ship and cloak type you can gain a massive advantage. There is no hard counter to this. You can play the meta game and hope that works out, but thats it. And attempting to hunt them is currently a joke. You have to hope that the pilot is actually active at that time and doesnt recognize your bait for what it is.
Problem with how cloaks currently work is the amount of safety they grant versus how much effort or risk is taken. Fit a T1 cloak to your rookie ship and viola you are now untouchable eyes in system. Should that really be all it takes to offer invulnerability?
Your idea of system defense is a little too binary for it to actually be engaging or fun. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1935
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 18:54:33 -
[12] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Rowells wrote:
So you think having to camp a gate for 23/7 is a valid tactic to keep someone out? And simply finding a single moment when the system is vulnerable means you wont have to risk anything beyond that?
Beyond travelling, you dont risk anything, but gain quite a bit of advantage. Depending on ship and cloak type you can gain a massive advantage. There is no hard counter to this. You can play the meta game and hope that works out, but thats it. And attempting to hunt them is currently a joke. You have to hope that the pilot is actually active at that time and doesnt recognize your bait for what it is.
Problem with how cloaks currently work is the amount of safety they grant versus how much effort or risk is taken. Fit a T1 cloak to your rookie ship and viola you are now untouchable eyes in system. Should that really be all it takes to offer invulnerability?
Your idea of system defense is a little too binary for it to actually be engaging or fun.
Bolded is the flaw. it's the same argument high sec people make when they say that gankers don't "pay" enough when they kill untanked industrial ships with destroyers (ie combat ships). It's nonsense, worrying about how much effort someone else is making rather than simply figuring out how you can make yourself safe no matter HOW MUCH effort they take is a character trait of people who complain about such things. Basically it's a victim mentality. The things I do to keep myself safe from afk cloakers and bad guys in null in general (syuch as wathcing intel, wathcing local, fitting to survive, making sure my overview is set right so i can warp out if I need to, arrange for defense fleet in whatever system im ratting in and DEFEND OUR ACCESS POINTS etc) take some effort and thinking, in fact they take more effort than fitting a cloak to a ship and traveling somewhere which is what afk cloakers do. That's fine because I'm the one who wants to not die lol. Worrying about how much effort someone else is putting in takes time away from my thinking about playing the game and thus my enjoyment. I don't expect CCP to play this game for me, and if somehow the 'field' isn't level I level it for myself, because I stopped needing to run to mommie for help some decades ago lol. I don't think this is an unreasonable standard for a mostly adult gaming community. You keep addressing this tactic of defending the access point, but i havent yet heard you explain why a T1 cloak needs to be a perfect safety net for all ships the the lowly rookie ship to the most massive titan. Please try and compare that to whatever highsec whining you've heard.
And it's somewhat ironic that you say my whining about effort is something only a carebear would say, but as soon as someone suggests it on the other end its a perfectly ok mechanic. How dare I demand that there be gameplay involved. So absurd.
And before you drag this argument where it doesn't matter, lets get back on the topic of cloaks and how they offer virtually perfect safety on practically every ship with a highslot. It doesnt matter how they got there. It really doesnt.
How about you consider this. Should capitals (namely supers) be allowed to cloak indefinitely and guarantee they dont risk anything until they are ready? Regardless of the hostility or friendliness of the system?
The current system is the exact definiton of binary. Binary is not fun when it is this extreme. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1935
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 19:26:29 -
[13] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Rowells wrote:
How about you consider this. Should capitals (namely supers) be allowed to cloak indefinitely and guarantee they dont risk anything until they are ready? Regardless of the hostility or friendliness of the system?
Yes. Because every other ship in the game can, so why not? So sorry CCP doesn't provide easier targets for you. Beyond that, the fundamental flaw in your thinking remains your obsession with what OTHER PEOPLE are risking. So you wouldn't mind having the old logoff timers back would you? since every ship can do it and I shouldnt care what other people are risking? You're risght, CCP doesnt want to provide easy targets for me, so bringing that back only makes sense. Hell, lets bring back even more mechanics! POS bowling, escaping concord, grid-wide doomsdays. Since CCP doesnt want to give anyone easy kills and I shouldnt care what other people are risking. Fair enough.
Also since we seem to believe my obsession with what other people risk is also fudamentally wrong, why do you care what highsecers whine when they get ganked or when null-bears want to risk less?
After all, considering that would be fundamentally wrong.
Jenn aSide wrote:Rowells wrote:The current system is the exact definiton of binary. Binary is not fun when it is this extreme. So somehow other people using what the game offers is not fun to you. Newsflash, it's not supposed to be. What isn't fun? the game? or the fact that there is something that proves to provide very little content outside of the meta to people? Or maybe you had something else in mind. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1935
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 22:45:25 -
[14] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Yeah, so in-space mines is probably never happening. I personally would like it revisited, but what with their recently going after drone mechanics to reduce server load (of which they are apparently big contributors), it seems highly unlikely.
I think there might be opportunity to revisit them under mobile structures, but Im not sure how difficult that would be. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1935
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 22:51:58 -
[15] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Rowells wrote:
So you think having to camp a gate for 23/7 is a valid tactic to keep someone out? And simply finding a single moment when the system is vulnerable means you wont have to risk anything beyond that?
Beyond travelling, you dont risk anything, but gain quite a bit of advantage. Depending on ship and cloak type you can gain a massive advantage. There is no hard counter to this. You can play the meta game and hope that works out, but thats it. And attempting to hunt them is currently a joke. You have to hope that the pilot is actually active at that time and doesnt recognize your bait for what it is.
Problem with how cloaks currently work is the amount of safety they grant versus how much effort or risk is taken. Fit a T1 cloak to your rookie ship and viola you are now untouchable eyes in system. Should that really be all it takes to offer invulnerability?
Your idea of system defense is a little too binary for it to actually be engaging or fun.
Bolded is the flaw. it's the same argument high sec people make when they say that gankers don't "pay" enough when they kill untanked industrial ships with destroyers (ie combat ships). It's nonsense, worrying about how much effort someone else is making rather than simply figuring out how you can make yourself safe no matter HOW MUCH effort they take is a character trait of people who complain about such things. Basically it's a victim mentality. The things I do to keep myself safe from afk cloakers and bad guys in null in general (syuch as wathcing intel, wathcing local, fitting to survive, making sure my overview is set right so i can warp out if I need to, arrange for defense fleet in whatever system im ratting in and DEFEND OUR ACCESS POINTS etc) take some effort and thinking, in fact they take more effort than fitting a cloak to a ship and traveling somewhere which is what afk cloakers do. That's fine because I'm the one who wants to not die lol. Worrying about how much effort someone else is putting in takes time away from my thinking about playing the game and thus my enjoyment. I don't expect CCP to play this game for me, and if somehow the 'field' isn't level I level it for myself, because I stopped needing to run to mommie for help some decades ago lol. I don't think this is an unreasonable standard for a mostly adult gaming community. To add on what you say, and comment on the bolded. The funny thing is, replace cloak with "docking in station", and the cloakers have the same arguement. All a pve'r has to do is dock with unlimited invulnerability. This is too easy. Perhaps we should be able to sabotage station docking by using a "hack" tool to jettison random players from station. Same principle as those wanting to nerf cloaks. Could you imagine the tears? I believe the major difference is the interaction and resources involved. I can RF or destroy a POS and I can flip a station or damage its services to the docked people (btw I fully support the idea of destructible stations). What's missing with cloaks is the opportunity to interfere with them in any way. There's not even an effective way to meddle with the Intel provided aside from being somewhere else. No false positives or anything like that.
And I'm not referring this discussion to ratting or mining (haven't done those hardcore for a while) but the availability of Intel and a secure cyno into a system. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 04:56:58 -
[16] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:My statement says no such thing. in fact, it does the opposite. 'Change cloaks with local'.
didnt you realise the reason afk cloaking happens is to get around local? havent you been reading?
You dont need to afk cloak to kill people in null-space. Kills can and do happen on a regular basis without camping a system, and most importantly without a cloak.
E: im speaking of ratter and miner kills specifically |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 07:14:32 -
[17] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:My statement says no such thing. in fact, it does the opposite. 'Change cloaks with local'.
didnt you realise the reason afk cloaking happens is to get around local? havent you been reading?
You dont need to afk cloak to kill people in null-space. Kills can and do happen on a regular basis without camping a system, and most importantly without a cloak. E: im speaking of ratter and miner kills specifically They died because they were either AFK or they were not paying attention. If you pay attention to your free, instant and unavoidable detection system that is local chat then you will never be caught. Sometimes yes, but not always, and not the majority. Plenty of people die even watching local. Slow warp outs, scrambled by new wave of rats, bumped on an asteroid, checking kill history of another hostile nearby, focusing on tasks remotely, all kinds of things. If someone is literally staring at local chat and nothing else while aligning out theyre eventually not going to have to worry about getting caught since they could just move to highsec. And its not at all surprising that someone who was prepared for you before you even got there (whether you show up on intel or not) is going to beat you to the chase. might as well complain that ships show up on grid before dropping out of warp. Must be unfair that they can see you before you get a chance to scram them.
People take risks. They always have and they always will. All in pursuit of that extra isk. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 07:27:24 -
[18] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Rowells wrote: You dont need to afk cloak to kill people in null-space. Kills can and do happen on a regular basis without camping a system, and most importantly without a cloak.
E: im speaking of ratter and miner kills specifically
Afk cloakers get killed too. So either AFK cloakers make mistakes too, or you can effectively defend yourself with a bit of work. Or both. so we dont need to change anything. \o/ That would be along the same line of thinking that supers used to get killed before crimewatch happened, so it should have been fine.
Its not as binary as that.
Also, I would like to hear how you can defend yourself (or manipulate in anyway) the advantage of intel that the cloaked ship provides? The intel which is used to protect and preserve the risk that the fleet standing behind his noobship provides?
Both sides of this argument seem to believe that the solution is as simple as "change nothing" or "remove the single thing i dislike".
Again, The issue isnt as binary as that. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 08:08:37 -
[19] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Rowells my retort was deliberately as simplistic as yours. You dnt have to be afk cloaking to make kills, you dont have to break cloaks to defend against afk cloakers. If you'd like to know how to manipulate the intel a cloaky can get on a ratter, you can fit a cyno on the ratting ship... Do you happen to remember the arguments people made against giving the skiff and procurer massive tank and drone damage bonuses? Things along the lines of "just hire protection scrub". And do you recall what the response from the devs and other players was on why this was a terrible idea? And if a cyno is an answer to your problems then you should be just fine with having hostiles trying to track you down, since your ship already has one.
And you still haven't provided me with an answer on how you can fiddle with the intel provided by eyes on site, especially considering those eyes can't be touched. Aside from actually changing what your doing by not doing it (thus changing the intel) there's nothing.
This isnt a simple problem with just cloaks and local. The entire intel/stealth system in eve is terrible. Most intel is handed to you in a nice little bag and requires no actual work from you other than opening a window and looking at it. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1939
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 15:07:29 -
[20] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rowells wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:My statement says no such thing. in fact, it does the opposite. 'Change cloaks with local'.
didnt you realise the reason afk cloaking happens is to get around local? havent you been reading?
You dont need to afk cloak to kill people in null-space. Kills can and do happen on a regular basis without camping a system, and most importantly without a cloak. E: im speaking of ratter and miner kills specifically They died because they were either AFK or they were not paying attention. If you pay attention to your free, instant and unavoidable detection system that is local chat then you will never be caught. Sometimes yes, but not always, and not the majority. No they die because they are dumb, every time. There is no excuse, local intel tool is infalable. and your proof? |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1941
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 17:28:32 -
[21] - Quote
I'd personally like to see the topic changed to the entire intelligence and stealth system. We try to focus on any single aspect and it drives down to all or nothing on it and forgets that there are other tools available that need work. |
|
|
|