Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
ghosttr
Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 07:25:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Frug It shouldn't be possible to be cloaked in 0.0 and go afk leaving nobody any way of finding you.
Although fixing local would deal with the annoyance.
I dont think CCP will ever remove local for the gankbears. The recent updates to local show that. But if CCP were to remove you from local, it would have to be pretty easy to find you. Or better yet if we cant see you in local you cant see us. Becuase local would require communication with the jumpgates, communication is 2-way. You would appear to everybody, and vice versa.
|
Chrysalis D'lilth
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 07:30:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Remove local, problem solved
Completely agree, or better yet, provide the option for players to 'opt out' of appearing in local
|
Vincent Gaines
Avis de Captura
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 07:32:00 -
[33]
Going without local will make the game very, very interesting.
|
Frozen Light
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 08:28:00 -
[34]
Maybe make the cloaking only possible to certain types of ships (covops / recon) ... then nomore whine! :)
|
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente Revelation Space
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 08:32:00 -
[35]
So I guess the nerf cries have moved to cloaking now?
|
P1lg1m
Caldari The Order of Odin
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 08:51:00 -
[36]
If anything should change... not saying that it should but, A "Covert-Ops" ship can only use the "Covert-Ops cloaking device II" with no penalties. The other ships can use the other cloaking devices but they have an Activation/De-activation time so it will stop peeps going afk.
|
Merick Dronome
Quantum Industries Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 09:25:00 -
[37]
I think the idea has merit. /signed
p.s. I just love it when PvPers come whine on a carebears forum post.
|
Sidster
FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 10:05:00 -
[38]
I think cloaked ships becoming probable would be the final act of caving in from CCP that'd make me seriously reconsider things.
-- Sig
Sniff, 300 bytes over the limit. |
BrerLapin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 17:59:00 -
[39]
Maybe If you had kept your stargates bubbled this wouldnt have happened. This is called psychological warfare. It is what makes eve a meta game. Why dont we then make it possible for one battleship to annailate 300 people because they decided they want to gang up and *****a few systems. Think about what your saying would do to the game. Maybe you should send you recons and go camp their systems.
|
Dranni
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 18:20:00 -
[40]
just make the prototype and the tech 2 cloak have a time limit.. You can only remain cloaked for an hour at a time, and then it will take 5-10 minutes to recharge, giving a prober enough time to at least try and catch you. And people who sit afk while cloaked well, they will get hit pretty hard.
|
|
Winterblink
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 18:28:00 -
[41]
Any probe capable of showing you the location of a cloaked vessel should be "so powerful" that it lights up like a cyno field, beacon and all (minus map visibility). The cloaker can then go and blow up the probe, gambling that he can survive whatever's there waiting for him. :)
Oh well, why not?
|
ghosttr
Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 18:29:00 -
[42]
Im hoping i can bring it up in todays dev chat. We just need something to counter cloaks, the safety it offers need to be limited, especially the t1 'prototype' version. The t2 version i beleive should remain unchanged.
|
Braaage
Laborius Chapter
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 18:45:00 -
[43]
I haven't read the entire thread so if these have already been mentioned then I apologise. I can see 2 solutions to this problem.
1) Make power usage much higher so say after 1 hour any ship that could have one fitted de-cloaked.
2) If a ship stays in 1 place for a prolonged period of time then it generates a signature which is scannable whether cloaked or not. Although it will be fairly easy to counter this one by heading in a direction and going afk. So maybe if a cloaked ship is in the same solarsystem and cloaked for a long time he generates a signature which can be scanned.
3) A scan probe that takes approx 30 mins to 1 hour to complete that can detect cloaked ships. Anything less will make the cloak worthless.
But also if you had scouts in your 0.0 systems watching for people you should have stopped them from getting in, in the first place.
|
TZeer
BURN EDEN Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 19:05:00 -
[44]
Originally by: ghosttr Im hoping i can bring it up in todays dev chat. We just need something to counter cloaks, the safety it offers need to be limited, especially the t1 'prototype' version. The t2 version i beleive should remain unchanged.
Stop whining, we killed you twice last night. We had 2 BS and you guys had what? 4-5? +additional cruisers, frigs. On top of that we where on the gate. Last time we had one BS. Get a grip. Learn to fight before you start crying for a nerf.
|
Merick Dronome
Quantum Industries Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 19:05:00 -
[45]
From my point of view, EVE as a whole lacks a certain amount of dynamic range. Take skills for example, 5 levels? And cloaks. 100% undetectable. Do Icelanders not seem to understand that everything doesn't have to always be just black and white? That in RL pretty much everything is considerably more dynamic then that yes/no, black/white, detectable/undetectable.
I would like to see CCP add one more bit to a lot of things. There should be a % chance to do everything. Even detecting a cloaked ship should have a % chance of succeeding, though for a cloaked ship, it should be very low, thus taking longer. Yes, I agree, a cloaked ship should be part of psychological warfare, but I also agree, if the guy is AFK, and and be idiot and say 'how do you know he's afk, you've done it, I've done it. But its no better then macro mining. The tactic is to achieve something while being able to be away from the keyboard. And as far as doing that when mining, or when performing psycho warfare on your opponent, CCPs stance was you should have to be at your keyboard when playing in EVE.
So I feel that point is a very valid point.
|
Erikel
Cosmic Odyssey YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:00:00 -
[46]
Wouldn't it be easier to just put a timer on the activation time of the cloak, say 10 -20 mins after activating the cloak, it starts blinking for a say a minute during which time you have to activate it again for it to continue cloaking, if not you decloak? That should take care of the AFK cloakers and not nerf anything.
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:25:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Sidster I think cloaked ships becoming probable would be the final act of caving in from CCP that'd make me seriously reconsider things.
As a recce pilot i agree... My cloak is my only defense to your blob. As it stands, I cannot do any dmg with my Covert (ever flyone?) so exaclty how is it fair that you get to remove my only defense?
Anywhere, Anytime. |
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:27:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Dranni just make the prototype and the tech 2 cloak have a time limit.. You can only remain cloaked for an hour at a time, and then it will take 5-10 minutes to recharge, giving a prober enough time to at least try and catch you. And people who sit afk while cloaked well, they will get hit pretty hard.
Don't like either, what if I am NOT AFK? your signing my death warrent with a 5-10 min ''exposed'' time.
And yes I have spent days cloaked in a system, but not AFK.
Anywhere, Anytime. |
Lemen Meringue
Cult of Lemen
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:30:00 -
[49]
Cloakers should be probably, it should just take longer/be harder than an uncloaked ship, and require modules that ONLY work for finding cloaked ships (you can search for one or the other, not both).
Covops/Recon pilots that are actually playing the game wouldn't be affected all that much, they just need to bounce around a bit. The ones that think it's hilarious to sit afk in local for two weeks straight would be the ones affected.
And for the record, I fly recons.
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:31:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Merick Dronome From my point of view, EVE as a whole lacks a certain amount of dynamic range. Take skills for example, 5 levels? And cloaks. 100% undetectable. Do Icelanders not seem to understand that everything doesn't have to always be just black and white? That in RL pretty much everything is considerably more dynamic then that yes/no, black/white, detectable/undetectable.
I would like to see CCP add one more bit to a lot of things. There should be a % chance to do everything. Even detecting a cloaked ship should have a % chance of succeeding, though for a cloaked ship, it should be very low, thus taking longer. Yes, I agree, a cloaked ship should be part of psychological warfare, but I also agree, if the guy is AFK, and and be idiot and say 'how do you know he's afk, you've done it, I've done it. But its no better then macro mining. The tactic is to achieve something while being able to be away from the keyboard. And as far as doing that when mining, or when performing psycho warfare on your opponent, CCPs stance was you should have to be at your keyboard when playing in EVE.
So I feel that point is a very valid point.
I am sorry, i must disagree. I am confused here, exactly what kind of threat is an AFK cloaked ship anyhow? Sounds to me like the issue is not AFK cloaking, but getting ganked via a cloak team.
Please remeber there are cloak pilots (solo ones too, like me) who make their money off keepiing systems ''under survailance''. So far all the proposed ''nerfs'' would end my career.
Anywhere, Anytime. |
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:33:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Lemen Meringue Cloakers should be probably, it should just take longer/be harder than an uncloaked ship, and require modules that ONLY work for finding cloaked ships (you can search for one or the other, not both).
Covops/Recon pilots that are actually playing the game wouldn't be affected all that much, they just need to bounce around a bit. The ones that think it's hilarious to sit afk in local for two weeks straight would be the ones affected.
And for the record, I fly recons.
Exactly what is wrong with keeping a system under survalance for two weeks? Why should it be nerfed? What would my employeers pay me for?
Anywhere, Anytime. |
Erikel
Cosmic Odyssey YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:36:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Swift Wind
Originally by: Merick Dronome From my point of view, EVE as a whole lacks a certain amount of dynamic range. Take skills for example, 5 levels? And cloaks. 100% undetectable. Do Icelanders not seem to understand that everything doesn't have to always be just black and white? That in RL pretty much everything is considerably more dynamic then that yes/no, black/white, detectable/undetectable.
I would like to see CCP add one more bit to a lot of things. There should be a % chance to do everything. Even detecting a cloaked ship should have a % chance of succeeding, though for a cloaked ship, it should be very low, thus taking longer. Yes, I agree, a cloaked ship should be part of psychological warfare, but I also agree, if the guy is AFK, and and be idiot and say 'how do you know he's afk, you've done it, I've done it. But its no better then macro mining. The tactic is to achieve something while being able to be away from the keyboard. And as far as doing that when mining, or when performing psycho warfare on your opponent, CCPs stance was you should have to be at your keyboard when playing in EVE.
So I feel that point is a very valid point.
I am sorry, i must disagree. I am confused here, exactly what kind of threat is an AFK cloaked ship anyhow? Sounds to me like the issue is not AFK cloaking, but getting ganked via a cloak team.
Please remeber there are cloak pilots (solo ones too, like me) who make their money off keepiing systems ''under survailance''. So far all the proposed ''nerfs'' would end my career.
My proposal won't end your career, it would just insure that you are actually in the system at the keyboard and really doing the job.
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:39:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Erikel
Originally by: Swift Wind
Originally by: Merick Dronome From my point of view, EVE as a whole lacks a certain amount of dynamic range. Take skills for example, 5 levels? And cloaks. 100% undetectable. Do Icelanders not seem to understand that everything doesn't have to always be just black and white? That in RL pretty much everything is considerably more dynamic then that yes/no, black/white, detectable/undetectable.
I would like to see CCP add one more bit to a lot of things. There should be a % chance to do everything. Even detecting a cloaked ship should have a % chance of succeeding, though for a cloaked ship, it should be very low, thus taking longer. Yes, I agree, a cloaked ship should be part of psychological warfare, but I also agree, if the guy is AFK, and and be idiot and say 'how do you know he's afk, you've done it, I've done it. But its no better then macro mining. The tactic is to achieve something while being able to be away from the keyboard. And as far as doing that when mining, or when performing psycho warfare on your opponent, CCPs stance was you should have to be at your keyboard when playing in EVE.
So I feel that point is a very valid point.
I am sorry, i must disagree. I am confused here, exactly what kind of threat is an AFK cloaked ship anyhow? Sounds to me like the issue is not AFK cloaking, but getting ganked via a cloak team.
Please remeber there are cloak pilots (solo ones too, like me) who make their money off keepiing systems ''under survailance''. So far all the proposed ''nerfs'' would end my career.
My proposal won't end your career, it would just insure that you are actually in the system at the keyboard and really doing the job.
How is having a chance to die a horrid death (in my uber Covert, that will pop when sneezed on) fair? Coverts have no D, your a recon pilot, right? You know how fragile a covert is. Fit a cloak and a probe launcher and your CPU is maxed. We give up all combat capabilities for the cloak, now you want to make us fight? I can't see how that is fair....
Anywhere, Anytime. |
Jessie Arr
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:42:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Jessie Arr on 19/04/2007 20:41:57 Local doesn't need to be removed, first off. I'm a carebear and I know all it takes is planning and a modicum of luck to avoid being ganked if you don't want to.
Second: while I hate people complaining about stuff instead of finding a way to beat it, here's a neat little idea that hasn't been proposed: give cloaks a 30 minute activation time. That way, you can cloak and go afk for dinner, you can cloak in SS and talk in chat for half an hour, but you can't cloak and go to bed. If you're AT the computer, you just click cloak again when it turns off and no one's the wiser that you're there. It doesn't affect anyone who wants to actively play or actively hide, but it prevents you from being 100% safe in a hostile system while you're not even at the keyboard. Cloakers SHOULD be able to hide forever with impunity, that's why they can afford to spend 40M on a cloak, but they shouldn't be able to do it while they sleep.
|
Kolwrath
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:43:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Kolwrath on 19/04/2007 20:40:16 Scenerio: Right now there's a sov system in 0.0 that's being camped by about 10 docked hostiles. These players are able to stay in system 23/7 with complete impunity because there's no way to kill a docked ship.
They are AFK most of the time. Checking the system periodically. When they see a somebody undock they undock, gank, retreat to a safe spot and warp around randomly for 15 mins, dock, and go back to doing something else: eating, heading to work, sleeping, whatever.
Meanwhile everyone else in that same system is spending all of their online time looking over their shoulders or running around trying to avoid the docker.
Problem Statement: The current station system provides these players with the safest position in the game. And it allows them to effect the play of dozens of other players even when they aren't even online.
Proposed Fix: A Tech II <something ludicruss .. oh yeah it must use fuel or something to limit use !! ooh yeah thats good> that lets the player assasinate a docked player. This could be a slow process (say, ten minutes or so). And maybe it's a little inaccurate, requiring multiple tries.
If the docked player is actively playing the game (logged in, watching the system) this shouldn't effect his play very much at all. He knows that he'll have about 10 minutes once he's docked before people start attempting to assasinate him, unless they get lucky. He can play the game along with everyone else and move every ten or fifteen minutes.
But this gets rid of the AKF docker. This "player" can reasonably expect that if he goes to work with his ship docked in a hostile system he'll come back to find himself podded and back in his home station.
Again, these people aren't "players." They may not even be interacting with Eve at all while they keep their target system tied up in knots. Docking, without a counter allows people to put in a tiny ammount of effort and adversely effect the gaming experience of 100s of people.
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:51:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Swift Wind on 19/04/2007 20:49:01 For all who want the cloak nerfed, here is what i don't get. Why should i be forced to play your game?
I spent 70mil on my covert cloak, now you propose to make it useless, just so you can ''win''.
Your inability to maintain control is not the cloaks fault, and it certianly is not a reason to nerf an ENTIRE community.
Anywhere, Anytime. |
Erikel
Cosmic Odyssey YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 20:57:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Swift Wind Edited by: Swift Wind on 19/04/2007 20:36:14
Originally by: Erikel
Originally by: Swift Wind
Originally by: Merick Dronome From my point of view, EVE as a whole lacks a certain amount of dynamic range. Take skills for example, 5 levels? And cloaks. 100% undetectable. Do Icelanders not seem to understand that everything doesn't have to always be just black and white? That in RL pretty much everything is considerably more dynamic then that yes/no, black/white, detectable/undetectable.
I would like to see CCP add one more bit to a lot of things. There should be a % chance to do everything. Even detecting a cloaked ship should have a % chance of succeeding, though for a cloaked ship, it should be very low, thus taking longer. Yes, I agree, a cloaked ship should be part of psychological warfare, but I also agree, if the guy is AFK, and and be idiot and say 'how do you know he's afk, you've done it, I've done it. But its no better then macro mining. The tactic is to achieve something while being able to be away from the keyboard. And as far as doing that when mining, or when performing psycho warfare on your opponent, CCPs stance was you should have to be at your keyboard when playing in EVE.
So I feel that point is a very valid point.
I am sorry, i must disagree. I am confused here, exactly what kind of threat is an AFK cloaked ship anyhow? Sounds to me like the issue is not AFK cloaking, but getting ganked via a cloak team.
Please remeber there are cloak pilots (solo ones too, like me) who make their money off keepiing systems ''under survailance''. So far all the proposed ''nerfs'' would end my career.
My proposal won't end your career, it would just insure that you are actually in the system at the keyboard and really doing the job.
How is having a chance to die a horrid death (in my uber Covert, that will pop when sneezed on) fair? Coverts have no D, your a recon pilot, right? You know how fragile a covert is. Fit a cloak and a probe launcher and your CPU is maxed. We give up all combat capabilities for the cloak, now you want to make us fight? I can't see how that is fair....
and... please explain to me how an AFK pilot is a problem, still missing that one.
Yes i am a cov ops pilot, but anyways, how are you going to die a horrid death if you aren't afk and can click whichever button (or press the hotkey) you have your cloak on? I didn't mean you decloak automatically and then have to recloak, i just meant that every once in a while you have to repress the hotkey or click on the cloak button.
As for why the afk is a problem, i think you know exactly what the problem is so i'm not gonna bother rehashing what a million people have already stated.
|
Corwain
Gallente Zero Team
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 21:03:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Swift Wind I spent 70mil on my covert cloak
Covert Ops Cloaks now cost 30mil (Jita yesterday) Improved Cloaks cost 10mil (Jita 2 days ago) Prototypes cost 2mil
Thank the gods! Invention works!
And as a Recon pilot I've gotta say a bit NO to the OP
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 21:07:00 -
[59]
I wouldn't mind some way of finding those people who like to sit cloaked 23/7 in hostile territory. Just doesn't seem right that there are invulnerable scouts.
|
Swift Wind
6rasshopper Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.19 21:12:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn I wouldn't mind some way of finding those people who like to sit cloaked 23/7 in hostile territory. Just doesn't seem right that there are invulnerable scouts.
Do you fly a covert? Invulnerable is not how i would decribe it.
We trade stealth for power. Why should you get the chance to pop my 700HP frig? Why would any idiot risk that much money, if our only chance of survival is taken from us?
Anywhere, Anytime. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |