Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 .. 343 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1176
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 05:04:53 -
[9271] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Or if they are afk, or tackled by npc's, stuck on a rock... If you are claiming 100% safety, then none of that should be an issue. Even in that worst-case scenario it's almost 100%. NPC tackle should be instantly killed as soon as it spawns, and you shouldn't be anywhere near rocks. So maybe there's a tiny window of vulnerability now and then where a hostile could come in at the exact perfect moment and catch you, but it's not really a relevant threat. The vast majority of PvE losses are people who weren't paying attention and/or willingly took the risk of staying active with a potential threat in system. Mike Voidstar wrote:Making it possible to find a cloaked ship through time and effort isn't leaving it as vulnerable as without a cloak.
There is such a thing as middle ground here. There really isn't a middle ground. Remember what I said about anti-cloak methods being either ineffective or automatic? Well, pick how long it should take to find a cloaked ship: If it's fairly long (minutes/hours) then it accomplishes nothing* but adding more buttons to press. The cloaked ship can easily dodge the attempt to find them by staying mobile and occasionally warping to a new location. You've made them press a few more buttons, and you've made the anti-cloaking side spend some time training skills and spend slots on the new modules, but you're still not going to do more than slightly inconvenience the cloaked ship. You will never successfully catch them. If it's fairly short (immediate to maybe a minute or two at most) you'll catch a cloaked ship, but the cloak becomes useless. The cloaked ship will be forced to constantly evade and be unable to accomplish its mission, and faces a constant threat of being decloaked and killed. And at that point there's very little reason to take a fragile and low-DPS covops ship instead of a much more powerful conventional ship. *We don't count "removing AFK cloakers so terrible players can PvP safely" as a benefit. The only people who are threatened by AFK cloaking are pathetic failures who should be ganked until they ragequit.
Ok. We have some progress. You accept that tiny windows of low probability vulnerability are not factors in the discussion. Which applies as much or more to cloaks in operation than anyone else.
No, I don't accept that having a ship be aware of its surroundings and actively participating in its own defense makes it useless. Just because you can only envision binary on/off options to stealth does not mean it's not possible to improve beyond that narrow scope. Depending on the means, the cloak at the very least limits the options of those hunting stealth ships, requiring the means be present and in operation.
In terms of your garbage tier alliance people, it means that you still disrupt their ISK generation while they hunt for you, since a single pilot can only fly one ship. It also means that your single stealth ship does not trump groups of active defense.
Best of all, everyone is active and fully involved in playing the game.
Remember, it does not matter if you get to press f1 against the target you hunt. You aren't entitled to that, just the ability to try. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
226
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 05:16:22 -
[9272] - Quote
Ok, enough of this thing where you argue that it's theoretically possible to nerf cloaks without over-nerfing them but never explain how. No more going on about "it's not binary" without proof. Post your proposed mechanic for cloak detection, including details on things like time/resource costs/etc, and we'll see how reasonable it is. I'm betting that it will fall into one of my two categories, but who knows, you could prove me wrong. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1176
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 06:21:45 -
[9273] - Quote
Go back and read the thread. Many suggestions have been given. My personal favorite was the one where scanning for cloaks produced false positives that had to be checked out. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
227
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 06:42:02 -
[9274] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Go back and read the thread. Many suggestions have been given. My personal favorite was the one where scanning for cloaks produced false positives that had to be checked out.
The thread is over 400 pages long. If you can't post your solution, complete with specific details, then you don't have a solution. And your "it can be interesting and not black and white and not an over-nerf" claims is, to put it politely, garbage. |
von Susla
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 10:02:14 -
[9275] - Quote
In first 30min cloaked ship is absolutely unscannable (even no signature). Like it is now. Cloaked ship can be scanned after 30min flying in grid (with perfect skilled scanner). Every next minute after 30min less skills will be enough to scan. To reset "scannable" state cloaked ship must change grid. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1176
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 17:46:43 -
[9276] - Quote
The gist of a proposal involving false positives:
Scanner module exclusive to covops, or a ship equivalent to a covops, that allows for the detection of cloaked signatures. Warp coordinates from this scanner are randomized within a certain distance so as to make it extremely unlikely to decloak a ship by warping to zero.
Each solar system continuously generates a number of false signatures (space debris or something), each lasting up to an hour or so, but staggered so that old signatures are eliminated and new signatures are up every few minutes. The debris can be destroyed early and easily. New false signatures will spawn within a few minutes of the ending of an older one so that without intensive effort there will always be a generally stable amount of noise on the scan.
Cloaked ships will have identical signatures to these false signatures. Cycling the cloak off and on will reset the randomly generated ID of the signature.
That gets you on grid, the first and greatest problem of how cloaks currently work.
My preferred solution for actually finding a cloaked ship on grid is a deployable that makes cloaked ships visible (perhaps as a shimmer or other effect) and targetable in space, but does not put them on the overview. While the cloak is active it grants a large boost to the signature of the ship so that it takes substantial time to target. How noticeable the cloak is will likely depend on the area.
With this it's possible to eliminate false positives until you find the ship, but doing so efficiently will require multiple people. Staying cloaked long term is more risky if someone is actively watching, as you can watch the false positives despawn and a signature that lasts too long is a ship, unless the pilot is actively taking the risk to reset his cloak. However, barring bad luck a cloaked ship will not be found quickly, let alone instantly, unless several scanning ships are working together to check all the signatures in the system.
Making a ship visible on grid but not to the overview allows calculated risk for the cloaking pilot while still rewarding attentive pilots the chance to find spys if the deployable is set up in advance. Between the set up time of the deployable and increased target time once you find a ship, cloaking pilots have ample time and warning to evade or engage on their own terms, without giving them an unbreakable lock on initiating an encounter. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6224
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 18:07:49 -
[9277] - Quote
von Susla wrote:In the first 30min cloaked ship is absolutely unscannable (even no signature). Like it is now. Cloaked ship can be scanned after 30min flying in grid (with perfect skilled scanner). Every next minute after 30min less skills will be enough to scan. To reset "scannable" state cloaked ship must change grid.
Yeah, no. You don't need more safety while ratting. Local already tells you he is there with certainty and to take precautions. You don't need more information at this point. If anything you should have less.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
1050
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 22:53:40 -
[9278] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Please demonstrate 100% safety. Remember, it has to be so safe you can atk in open space with no danger.
And I think you mean your playstyle will become challenging and interactive with other players, not destroyed.
Watching local while being aligned doing PvE in sov null is 100% safety. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 23:08:04 -
[9279] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Please demonstrate 100% safety. Remember, it has to be so safe you can atk in open space with no danger.
And I think you mean your playstyle will become challenging and interactive with other players, not destroyed. Watching local while being aligned doing PvE in sov null is 100% safety.
No. Your actions are required to make it safe. Actions like staying aligned, taking care of Npc tackle first, staying clear of obstacles, staying alert to potential threats.
Cloaking is 100% safe. Other than activating the cloak you need do nothing at all. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.13 23:14:51 -
[9280] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Sonya Corvinus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Please demonstrate 100% safety. Remember, it has to be so safe you can atk in open space with no danger.
And I think you mean your playstyle will become challenging and interactive with other players, not destroyed. Watching local while being aligned doing PvE in sov null is 100% safety. No. Your actions are required to make it safe. Actions like staying aligned, taking care of Npc tackle first, staying clear of obstacles, staying alert to potential threats. Cloaking is 100% safe. Other than activating the cloak you need do nothing at all.
Yes, because in the first case you are getting ISK and resources, in the second you aren't.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
1050
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 01:00:51 -
[9281] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Sonya Corvinus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Please demonstrate 100% safety. Remember, it has to be so safe you can atk in open space with no danger.
And I think you mean your playstyle will become challenging and interactive with other players, not destroyed. Watching local while being aligned doing PvE in sov null is 100% safety. No. Your actions are required to make it safe. Actions like staying aligned, taking care of Npc tackle first, staying clear of obstacles, staying alert to potential threats. Cloaking is 100% safe. Other than activating the cloak you need do nothing at all. Yes, because in the first case you are getting ISK and resources, in the second you aren't.
Not empty quoting |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 02:48:43 -
[9282] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Sonya Corvinus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Please demonstrate 100% safety. Remember, it has to be so safe you can atk in open space with no danger.
And I think you mean your playstyle will become challenging and interactive with other players, not destroyed. Watching local while being aligned doing PvE in sov null is 100% safety. No. Your actions are required to make it safe. Actions like staying aligned, taking care of Npc tackle first, staying clear of obstacles, staying alert to potential threats. Cloaking is 100% safe. Other than activating the cloak you need do nothing at all. Yes, because in the first case you are getting ISK and resources, in the second you aren't. Not empty quoting
Sure. We can go back to pods and shuttles not also being 100% safe. That's cool. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 17:45:06 -
[9283] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Sure. We can go back to pods and shuttles not also being 100% safe despite not making ISK or gathering resources. That's cool.
It does not matter what you are doing. There are more things to accomplish than just gathering resources or making ISK. That cloaked camp is working toward a goal, one that others should be able to disrupt if they choose just like everyone else in the game. The same is true of any other use of a cloak. There is nothing in game taking place in space that should be immune to interference from other players.
The reason you can't claim the target you want to hunt is 100% safe is because he must take action, opting in to safety by leaving the play area. Note that if cloaks can be found you may also hunt the ones that are operating in solar systems without a POS or station, unless they log off.
By comparison the cloaked camper must opt in to danger, being 100% safe until he chooses otherwise. This is against the core design of EVE. He is making progress, or possibly even accomplishing, his goal yet is immune to interference until he chooses otherwise.
Not this straw man again....
You want to disrupt the non-activity of a guy not at his keyboard because that non-active not at his keyboard guy is somehow disrupting your activities...do we understand you correctly?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 17:52:55 -
[9284] - Quote
Nope.
There are more uses of cloaks than camping afk under a cloak. All of them, including disrupting that camp, should be subject to disruption. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 18:22:02 -
[9285] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Nope.
There are more uses of cloaks than camping afk under a cloak. All of them, including disrupting that camp, should be subject to disruption.
That you can't disrupt them Mike is your problem, not my, not Sonya's not CCP's. Your problem. Go deal with it. Get in fleet, get on comms, rat/mine in a group if necessary. Not everything has to have a hard direct counter.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
1050
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 20:27:35 -
[9286] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Sure. We can go back to pods and shuttles not also being 100% safe despite not making ISK or gathering resources. That's cool.
It does not matter what you are doing. There are more things to accomplish than just gathering resources or making ISK. That cloaked camp is working toward a goal, one that others should be able to disrupt if they choose just like everyone else in the game. The same is true of any other use of a cloak. There is nothing in game taking place in space that should be immune to interference from other players.
The reason you can't claim the target you want to hunt is 100% safe is because he must take action, opting in to safety by leaving the play area. Note that if cloaks can be found you may also hunt the ones that are operating in solar systems without a POS or station, unless they log off.
By comparison the cloaked camper must opt in to danger, being 100% safe until he chooses otherwise. This is against the core design of EVE. He is making progress, or possibly even accomplishing, his goal yet is immune to interference until he chooses otherwise.
If it doesn't matter what you're doing and there are more things to accomplish than making ISK, you agree that we should get rid of local in null then, right?
After all, all local does is protect people PvE-ing to get ISK in sov null. |
Maria Dragoon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
126
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 20:41:00 -
[9287] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Nope.
There are more uses of cloaks than camping afk under a cloak. All of them, including disrupting that camp, should be subject to disruption.
Do I get the ability to eject people that are AFK inside of stations or POSes as well? :o
Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. Confucius
"A man who talks to people who aren't real is crazy. A man who talks to people who aren't real and writes down what they say is an author."
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 23:34:47 -
[9288] - Quote
Maria Dragoon wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Nope.
There are more uses of cloaks than camping afk under a cloak. All of them, including disrupting that camp, should be subject to disruption. Do I get the ability to eject people that are AFK inside of stations or POSes as well? :o
Stations are designated out of the play area (space) so as to allow for the accumulation of assets to make all other gameplay meaningful.. You can eject people out of POS, just not solo and not trivially.
Nice try at drawing a false equvilqncy though. |
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
1050
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 23:47:51 -
[9289] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Stations are designated out of the play area (space) so as to allow for the accumulation of assets to make all other gameplay meaningful.. You can eject people out of POS, just not solo and not trivially.
Nice try at drawing a false equvilqncy though.
read this,
https://steamcommunity.com/app/8500/discussions/0/364040961439188705/
Notice one of the golden rules of EVE is you are safe in a cloaked safespot. They are designated out of play areas as per the devs.
/thread. |
Maria Dragoon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
126
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 00:22:22 -
[9290] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Stations are designated out of the play area (space) so as to allow for the accumulation of assets to make all other gameplay meaningful.. You can eject people out of POS, just not solo and not trivially.
Nice try at drawing a false equvilqncy though. read this, https://steamcommunity.com/app/8500/discussions/0/364040961439188705/ Notice one of the golden rules of EVE is you are safe in a cloaked safespot. They are designated out of play areas as per the devs. /thread.
Well, I was just going to give him a run around, but it seems you are a little more direct about it. :(
Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. Confucius
"A man who talks to people who aren't real is crazy. A man who talks to people who aren't real and writes down what they say is an author."
|
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 01:44:05 -
[9291] - Quote
That's a nice appeal to authority. Not the worst fallacy you could try if lacked a logical position. Too bad it's neither authoritative or relevant.
First, it's just an outdated wiki comment, not a development document. Second, this is features and Ideas, not How things currently are.
It's nice to hear you admit you aren't interested in actually discussing anything, and instead just want to give opposing positions the run around to clog the board with trash posting. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 03:53:59 -
[9292] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:That's a nice appeal to authority. Not the worst fallacy you could try if lacked a logical position. Too bad it's neither authoritative or relevant.
First, it's just an outdated wiki comment, not a development document. Second, this is features and Ideas, not How things currently are.
It's nice to hear you admit you aren't interested in actually discussing anything, and instead just want to give opposing positions the run around to clog the board with trash posting.
That was written by Akita T who is a much better player and understands this game better than you or I. Most of those rules still apply today.
Also, nobody is opposed to discussion, we just are not interested in nonsense about how you should have enhanced safety for engaging in various ISK making activities in NS.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 04:18:16 -
[9293] - Quote
As I said, not authoritative, nor relevant to a discussion about change.
If you are uninterested in honest discussion, feel free to excuse yourself. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 04:41:34 -
[9294] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:As I said, not authoritative, nor relevant to a discussion about change.
If you are uninterested in honest discussion, feel free to excuse yourself.
It is authoritative as it was on the EVE wiki back when it existed.
And the only one uninterested in honest discussion is you.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Luc Chastot
701
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:03:46 -
[9295] - Quote
Cloaking modules should have an active counter that requires time and precision to work. I don't care much about people being forced out of their ratting schedules (it's not hard to rat elsewhere), but if someone wants to hide inside someone else's space indifinitely and provide intel, that person has to put actual effort into avoiding being detected and killed. He can stay cloaked as long as he wants, but at least periodic warping should be required.
Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:07:11 -
[9296] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:Cloaking modules should have an active counter that requires time and precision to work. I don't care much about people being forced out of their ratting schedules (it's not hard to rat elsewhere), but if someone wants to hide inside someone else's space indifinitely and provide intel, that person has to put actual effort into avoiding being detected and killed. He can stay cloaked as long as he wants, but at least periodic warping should be required.
What is the active counter to local?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
229
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:23:23 -
[9297] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Why does local need an active counter?
Apparently everything in EVE requires a counter, as is the standard argument against cloaking.
[quote[Also, it can be countered by keeping it flooded with neutrals, log off traps, and awoxing.[/quote]
Log off traps are unreliable at best against someone who is smart (IOW, doesn't warp right back to their carebear site as soon as the threat leaves local), your chances of logging back in at the right time are tiny at best. Flooding local with neutrals is exactly what AFK cloaking is about, but you want to get rid of that for some reason. And awoxing can work, but only if you have a specific target in mind and are willing to invest considerable time (and likely financial assets, to buy a new character/account) to infiltrate their corp for a one-time kill and aren't just hunting targets in general. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
6225
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:24:17 -
[9298] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Cloaking modules should have an active counter that requires time and precision to work. I don't care much about people being forced out of their ratting schedules (it's not hard to rat elsewhere), but if someone wants to hide inside someone else's space indifinitely and provide intel, that person has to put actual effort into avoiding being detected and killed. He can stay cloaked as long as he wants, but at least periodic warping should be required. What is the active counter to local? Why does local need another an active counter? It can be countered by keeping it flooded with neutrals, log off traps, and awoxing.
Seriously? it gives you advanced warning, is never wrong, and can't be countered......
If you have that, why shouldn't cloaks not have an active counter?
See, you simply want your cake and to eat it too.
Nice try Mike, but you just outed yourself as not really being interested in balance.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:24:29 -
[9299] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:He can stay cloaked as long as he wants, but at least periodic warping should be required. Warping back and forth between two safespots every X minutes is tedious busywork, not meaningful gameplay depth. This kind of thing needs to be avoided.
That would be his choice. He could watch for histiles, wait till he sees the probes, and ply warp when needed. You know... Like active, non-scripted people do. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1178
|
Posted - 2017.03.15 05:25:47 -
[9300] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Cloaking modules should have an active counter that requires time and precision to work. I don't care much about people being forced out of their ratting schedules (it's not hard to rat elsewhere), but if someone wants to hide inside someone else's space indifinitely and provide intel, that person has to put actual effort into avoiding being detected and killed. He can stay cloaked as long as he wants, but at least periodic warping should be required. What is the active counter to local? Why does local need another an active counter? It can be countered by keeping it flooded with neutrals, log off traps, and awoxing. Seriously? it gives you advanced warning, is never wrong, and can't be countered...... If you have that, why shouldn't cloaks not have an active counter? See, you simply want your cake and to eat it too. Nice try Mike, but you just outed yourself as not really being interested in balance.
No, I have engaged in discussions on local as well. Specifically your point on it reporting you before you are loaded.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 .. 343 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |