EVE Search - (Long) What if we all get what we want...

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Features and Ideas Discussion

(Long) What if we all get what we want...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Reply to Topic \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 189	Posted - 2012.03.22 08:05:00 - [1] - Quote Lets consider a future where we all get what we want. Decloakers and no local, this is what I imagine. A group of people living in their 0.0 system is having a nice mining operation, lasers pulsing, the orca moving ore to the POS. A leisurely day, lots of iskies for everyone. A new post in the intel channel grabs your attention, Cloaky jumping gates and it looks like he's heading your direction! Just keeps getting better you think to yourself, the intel drones on the gates ping the broadcast with a new contact in system...no wave in local, must be the cloaky. The fleet was already warping back to the POS to reship and you urge them to hurry, moments later they are all in their cloaky camping ships and ready to go; Sabre, Lachesis with the decloaker, 3 Canes, 2 Inties, and you in the Drake running links. "Warp to the outbound gate, warp warp warp, he's still in system!" The sling bubble must have caught him. Like countless times before, the silly solo bomber thinks he can get easy kills...not with us. "Sabre bubble up on landing, Inties get ready for decloak." They all know there roles well, we've done this before. When the fleet lands the familiar shape of the bubble envelopes the fleet and the Lachesis starts cycling the decloaker. BAM second cycle drops and the blank bracket on the overview appears and immediately the inty's race for the spot, they won't get an update until the next cycle in 7 seconds, so they have to hurry. "There we go!" Manticore decloaked and immediately the fleet begins to lock it up, "EWAR only," we want to share the killmail. "3..2..1..Fire!" the ships blows to tiny bits and the pod is given the same treatment. "Good job guys we got 'em!" You haven't even finished your transmission when you check the wreck and see a covert cyno in it, and seemingly at the same time an Arazu decloaks at the edge of the bubble. "Primary Arazu, Primary Arazu!" The fleet begins to lock up the Force Recon, it lights a covert cyno! "Warp out! Everybody safe up!" Your overview begins to fill with enemy ships, just glancing it looks like 3 Falcons, 2 Rapiers, and a mess load of bombers. Firing another volley at the Arazu the bubble drops and one of the Inty's warp to safety, the other one already popped. Your overview begins to fill with yellow and then red brackets torpedo's begin to take down your shields at an alarming rate. In an attempt to target one of the bombers for some heroics, you find out the hard way that you are jammed. Spamming the warp button your Drake dies in short order and you warp away, only one inty was at the pos everybody else warping back in pods. You report in intel that a Black Ops fleet is in the area and that everyone should beef up security on there operations. GF's pop up in local, and you respond in kind. I was considering whether this needed it's own thread or not; in light of the repeated anti-cloaking probes and similar idea threads popping up, I think that this deserves a full well thought out thread. Proposal: -Create a system where Cloaking has variable strengths, and that actions from both the cloaker and hunter effect that strength. -Make Cloaking dependant on Mass and Signature Radius, larger ships should be harder to hide. -Make Cloak detection based on Sensor Strength and Signature Resolution, I believe that this follows a logical progression. -Create a new active scanning technique to help in the detection of cloaked ships, this should be implimented after local is set to delayed or removed completely. -Modify D-Scan to have variable information given at different distances, long range scans only give the ship size and race while short range scans might give the same information we get now.
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 189	Posted - 2012.03.22 08:05:00 - [2] - Quote Part 1: Active Scanning Array & Directional Scanner The Active Scanning Array (ASA): Operates as a intense, on grid, scanning system specifically to strain cloaking devices; this scanning system will weaken the cloaking devices ability to maintain a cloaking field. The ASA will be a High Slot module that takes about 200 CPU and 1 PG. To use the ASA you will need to have an additional skill (Advanced Signature Analysis: Prerequisite-Signature Analysis 5). The ASA uses two attributes from your ship to determine the strength of your scan, Sensor Strength and Scan Resolution and will use a simple equation to determine the strength of the Destabalization Effect. (Example Equation, not final) see below for use Destabalization Effect=(Sensor Strength/100)+(Scan Resolution/1000) The idea is to make it so larger ships have an advantage due to Sensor Strength and Smaller Ships have an advangate due to Scan Resolution. Normal values should come out betwenn 0.5-1.5. The Destabalization Effect will play in directly with Cloaking harmonics which will be discussed in the next section. The strength of the Destabalization Effect is only 100% effective at closer ranges, it will eventually fall off into no effect at all. Range: Effectiveness: 0-15 KM 100% 15-30 KM 50% 30-60 KM 25% 60-120 KM 12% 120-240 KM 6% This means that you will still have an effect at long ranges but it falls off rapidly as distance increases. Directional Scanner: will be changed in a few ways; Distance will now be a slider with values of 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 au Depending on the distance you set it at it will give more detailed information about signatures picked up, 0.5 au: Name of Ship and exact ship model; 1 au: Exact ship model; 2 au: Tech level of ship, size, and race; 4 au: Ship size and race; 8 au: size; 16 au: Ship signature. I believe that perfect information is bad, so this scale allows for different types of information to be gleaned off of the scan. Part 2: Cloaking Strength and Harmonics Cloaking will now have variable strengths that are effected by many different types of inputs both from the cloaker and the enemy, if it falls to low the cloaking systems fail and this will result in a decloak. Cloaking Strength: is basically how strong your basic cloak is. Each Cloaking module has a stregth modifier, Normal Mods 1 and Covops 2, this can be modified by a new skill (Advanced Cloaking: Prequisites-Cloaking 4). Cloaking Strength is based off of two ship attributes, Mass and Signature Radius. (Example Equation, not final) Base Cloaking Strength=((10000/Mass)+(100/Signature Raduis))Strength Modifier The idea is to make it so bigger and non specialized ships have more difficulty maintaining the cloak. NOTE: If Cloaking Strength is between 0 and 1 Cloaking device will only reduce there signature raduis, not fully cloak them, but will provide the same effects as an ASA decloak(discussed later) this means that they will show up on d-scan and they will be able to be scanned down via combat probes! Cloaking Harmonics:* is how effective your cloaking system is at stabalizing a cloaking field. Cloaking devices have Harmonics values as follows, Normal Cloaks 1 Covops 2, which can be modified by a skill (Cloaking Harmonics: Prerequisites-Cloaking 4). When a player commits an action, or an ASA is active on the field the cloaking strength will be effected, being reduced until it is restabalized. Action Destabalization D-Scan 20% Warp 45% Movement 5% Probe Scan 45% ASA Effects Variable The cloaking field will need to be restabalized which will cost capacitor and will replenish every second if there is energy to do so. The amount consumed is directly proportionate to the amount of cloak depleted, 45% depleted, 45% cap usage, a new skill (Cloaking Efficiency: Prerequisites-Cloaking 4) will bring this value down 10% per level. This will make it so Cloaks on field with active ASA's on them will have to work hard to maintain the cloak. Eventually they will be decloaked and when they do, they will also be capped out. ASA's ability to provide decloak is based on simple math. (Example Equation, not final) ASA Destabalization %=(Cloaking Harmonics/ASA Destabalization Effect)*100 In its basic functions the cloaker sitting near a group that has an ASA running will eventually run out of cap and then get decloaked. When a ship is detected on grid it shows up as a blank bracket at the spot it was at when the scanner cycled, this will give the decloakers a position, and then can attempt to decloak manually.
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 189	Posted - 2012.03.22 08:14:00 - [3] - Quote Reserved for changes
Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 347	Posted - 2012.03.22 08:58:00 - [4] - Quote Removing local and destroying cloaks isn't going to instantly turn Eve into some "gf" paradise. It's pretty easy for a decent pilot to get around a gatecamp in a cloaky, your proposal changes that. That isn't dealing with afk cloaking, that is breaking cloaking. For one thing, you just broke wormholes. For another, you just made it impossible to get through a gate camp. Stick one or more of these things around a gate and poof, cloakies gonna die. And those gate camps are not going to be set up to "protect our care bears" or some idealistic rubbish like that, we're just gonna use them in high traffic areas and gank random passers by that have nothing to do with us. And besides, you really expect a mining operation to have a bunch of sabre and ceptor pilots on hand, not to mention an intricate system of highly alert alts/scouts sitting afk on gate 24/7? And what exactly are they going to do against a black ops gang other than die in a fire? Or are you expecting us PvP types to protect them? Because we won't, mining is already a ridiculously low profit profession, and unless they were willing to pay us pretty much everything they earn it's very unlikely anyone would bother to protect them. Time delayed local, maybe. Removing local? No, there are just too many issues with this proposal that you've either deliberately ignored or just genuinely overlooked. Which is kind of worrying, because all those problems have been brought up time and time again in the thousands of threads completely identical to your own. tl;dr: It breaks cloaking for WH dwellers, completely nullifies it's use in non-combat scenarios and doesn't result in the magical "gf" paradise the OP thinks it will. -ahttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 190	Posted - 2012.03.22 09:11:00 - [5] - Quote Simi, I think your mad about something. I understand that you don't have a problem with the way things are right now and niether do I. If you see glaring holes in my proposal please point them out, I do believe that delayed local is the best option. I wish to do this in a calm civil matter that doesn't include a rant like yours. I am completely flexable and I also understand that CCP wants to do something with cloaking. I don't want the only options being presented to just be 'add anti-cloaking probes because thats worse' TBH you repsonse is just a knee reaction to anything that suggests a change to the status quo, I do it too. I didn't break WH's because you can still passively observe without being seen, the active anticloak is not all seeing infact it almost requires the cloaker to mess up. You can still slip through camps just as easily, the campers just have a better notion on where you were going so they actually have a 'chance' to get you. I don't think that a magical 'GF' world exhists here, but any pvper worth there salt will still give it up if they've been beaten. You seem bitter about something and you're taking it out in that last post, if you need to talk to someone I am here for you. Just let me know.
Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 347	Posted - 2012.03.22 09:31:00 - [6] - Quote Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Simi, I think your mad about something. I understand that you don't have a problem with the way things are right now and niether do I. Actually I hate AFK cloaking, I just don't think this is the way to fix it. I also think all the various parts of your proposal have been proposed numerous times before, each time ripped apart and argued over for pages upon pages. Other than the fact that this thread is destined to go the same way, it would have been nice if you'd started off by acknowledging and attempting to address the immediately obvious flaws. Gerrick Palivorn wrote: If you see glaring holes in my proposal please point them out, I do believe that delayed local is the best option. I wish to do this in a calm civil matter that doesn't include a rant like yours. I am completely flexable and I also understand that CCP wants to do something with cloaking. I don't want the only options being presented to just be 'add anti-cloaking probes because thats worse' I'm British, everything I type comes across with a sheen of semi-sarcastic rage. And the only proposals aren't anti-cloaking probes. We've had everything from on grid cloaker warning systems, to heavily discussed intel changes and even one suggestion to make high EHP rats point those running anomalies/mining, so that roaming gangs have a chance to catch them when blitzing belts. We've also had quite a few proposals almost identical to your own, that try and combine elements of all the other ideas on the subject. Gerrick Palivorn wrote: TBH you repsonse is just a knee jerk reaction to anything that suggests a change to the status quo, I do it too. I didn't break WH's because you can still passively observe without being seen, the active anticloak is not all seeing infact it almost requires the cloaker to mess up. You can still slip through camps just as easily, the campers just have a better notion on where you were going so they actually have a 'chance' to get you. So a decloaking device that decloaks best at 0-15km won't buff gate camps. Erm, ok. This is what I mean by idealistic rubbish, we would abuse the CRAP out of that. Hell, set that decloak chance to 25% at 0-15km if you want, we'll just stick four of them around the gate. Gerrick Palivorn wrote: You seem bitter about something and you're taking it out in that last post, if you need to talk to someone I am here for you. Just let me know. Thanks broski, I'll hit you up in game later and we can cry in local together <3 -ahttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg
Blatant Forum Alt Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 49	Posted - 2012.03.22 09:45:00 - [7] - Quote At its heart, this is still just another nerf cloaking proposal. Therefore no. Its a f*cking cloak. It, erm, CLOAKS the ship. What is wrong with that? Nothing. Also, afk cloakers can do literally no harm, if people dock up whenever they see a neutral in local, thats their decision, they could continue mining alongside the afk player, who is afk. And no to a delayed local, that just turns null sec into wormhole space, so no.
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 190	Posted - 2012.03.22 10:11:00 - [8] - Quote Simi Kusoni wrote: So a decloaking device that decloaks best at 0-15km won't buff gate camps. Erm, ok. This is what I mean by idealistic rubbish, we would abuse the CRAP out of that. Hell, set that decloak chance to 25% at 0-15km if you want, we'll just stick four of them around the gate. Ok it is quite clear that you didn't even read the OP, or if you did you didn't even understand the process, the % is not a chance, it's the basically how hard the cloaker has to work to avoid being detected. That can be at 100% and still not detect the cloaker. Quote: Gerrick Palivorn wrote: You seem bitter about something and you're taking it out in that last post, if you need to talk to someone I am here for you. Just let me know. Thanks broski, I'll hit you up in game later and we can cry in local together <3 Good meet me in my WH and let me know when you get there. A little o/ is all I need.
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 190	Posted - 2012.03.22 10:13:00 - [9] - Quote Blatant Forum Alt wrote: At its heart, this is still just another nerf cloaking proposal. Therefore no. Its a f*cking cloak. It, erm, CLOAKS the ship. What is wrong with that? Nothing. Also, afk cloakers can do literally no harm, if people dock up whenever they see a neutral in local, thats their decision, they could continue mining alongside the afk player, who is afk. And no to a delayed local, that just turns null sec into wormhole space, so no. Your one of those carebears that like the 100% accurate instant intel thing. Well tough, things are changing, you can either help it along or get left behind. 'Remember when null had local' you will say, 'yeah those were the good ole' days!' Then you'll open your agent convo for the next mission...
Aqriue Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 497	Posted - 2012.03.22 10:25:00 - [10] - Quote Entire thread, well thought out, sounds like... Butthurt over Cloaks and a ninja stealth to AFK with it in general. Stopped reading after the first post, cause there is another bitchwhine thread already out there about dealing with AFK cloaking.

Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 348	Posted - 2012.03.22 12:16:00 - [11] - Quote Blatant Forum Alt wrote: Also, afk cloakers can do literally no harm, if people dock up whenever they see a neutral in local, thats their decision, they could continue mining alongside the afk player, who is afk. Well, that's just semantics. The issue isn't AFK cloaking, that's just the generic title given to it because it sums up the activity best. The issue is that: a) People need to AFK cloak, because null sec is too safe. This is a boring way of killing people, and it's quite limited in how successful it is. b) AFK cloaking can be used to tie down entire systems with little/no risk, attempts to ignore or combat AFK cloakers usually ends in hot drops. As much as I hate risk averse pussies, even I've got to admit that is a lame way to lose your ship. Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Ok it is quite clear that you didn't even read the OP, or if you did you didn't even understand the process, the % is not a chance, it's the basically how hard the cloaker has to work to avoid being detected. That can be at 100% and still not detect the cloaker. I did, the cloaker when he jumps into system is going to be bubbled. Now he's going to have to pulse his MWD, try and get out of the bubble and to make it worse the moment he activates his cloak his cap is going to start draining even more. And he needs his cap to stay cloaked... Even ignoring the warp destabilization, and the speed penalty, this is going to make it very easy to catch and kill cloaked ships. A cruiser or frigate hull is going to get capped out very, very quickly especially after pulsing their MWD. -ahttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg
L0rdF1end STA'IN The Devil's Warrior Alliance 35	Posted - 2012.03.22 13:34:00 - [12] - Quote Cool story Bro and I like your ideas a lot. I like to think SOV as being your very own castle made out of the systems you own. Castles should be largely impenetrable, a single cloaky should not have the ability to upset what that Alliance decides to do behind its defence walls. A single cloaky should not be able to easily penetrate into the castle. Internal spies is where the espionage should be at which grants the ability to plan attacks on said Alliance. NPC space is different and should be treated as such, although I would like to see more dominance from the owning NPC race having more control over what goes on in their space. For instance, NPC's detect a CYNO going up and should be able to react to intruders within their space. All belt rats warp in on cyno or something like that. I don't think thats a very good example but there needs to be tighter control allowed to those that own the space, NPC or players.
Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 350	Posted - 2012.03.22 13:41:00 - [13] - Quote L0rdF1end wrote: For instance, NPC's detect a CYNO going up and should be able to react to intruders within their space. All belt rats warp in on cyno or something like that. Those belt rats would totally obliterate my Wyvern, I hope they don't implement this. -ahttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg
L0rdF1end STA'IN The Devil's Warrior Alliance 35	Posted - 2012.03.22 13:59:00 - [14] - Quote Yeah, that wasn't the greatest example but I hope you get where I'm coming from.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk Glorious Revolution The 99 Percent 53	Posted - 2012.03.22 16:31:00 - [15] - Quote "Lets consider a future where we all get what we want. Decloakers and no local, this is what I imagine." You have to remove either "we all get what we want" or "Decloakers". You can't have both, luckily. Seriously... Stop talking about removing the psychological warfare part of cloakies; it is more or less all they are good for. I know that the unknow is frightening and you feel like you must nuke it from orbit, but suggesting the destruction of 12 (not counting cov ops) ships is not a good way to get the attention from devs. Now please use the current game mechanics to set a trap (cloaky dic + overtanked mining ship?) to outsmart and kill them. Oh...? It is too much work to kill a pesky cloaker? TOO BAD! Go back to highsec where you're safe!
Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 352	Posted - 2012.03.22 18:37:00 - [16] - Quote Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote: Now please use the current game mechanics to set a trap (cloaky dic + overtanked mining ship?) to outsmart and kill them. Oh...? It is too much work to kill a pesky cloaker? TOO BAD! Go back to highsec where you're safe! Cloaky dictor isn't really going to do jack about a black ops hot drop, let alone supers or a titan bridge. -ahttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg
Leto Aramaus Ixion Defence Systems Tactical Narcotics Team 38	Posted - 2012.03.22 19:54:00 - [17] - Quote I read your ASA post on the module that will be able to de-cloak ships within a certain range... WAY overpowered. 100% chance of decloaking anything within 15km? are you serious? Why not just ask CCP to take cloaks out of the game?
Miss Whippy Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 133	Posted - 2012.03.22 20:15:00 - [18] - Quote Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Lets consider a future where we all get what we want. Decloakers and no local, this is what I imagine. Stopped reading after this. When did WE agree we all want this? Time to-aCOMPLETELY REDESIGN THE U.I. FROM SCRATCH: - End the click fest & Multiple Window fest - Streamline and Simplify it-a - Improve scalability-a
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 191	Posted - 2012.03.22 21:33:00 - [19] - Quote Whats funny is how I've taken something that is a 'hot topic' issue, introduced the idea of a middle ground between the two, put a fancy spin on the first post. Then I made the second post complex and hard to follow. It was interesting to see how almost all your comments literally ignored the points that I wrote in a few sentences. I gave you a tl;dr and that was too complicated because you are automatically turned off by the idea of any change besides your own opinions. Reread just the tl;dr and go from there. I'll give you a hint, it's at the bottom of the first post.
Kiroma Halandri Malicious Mission Murderers 14	Posted - 2012.03.23 00:30:00 - [20] - Quote Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Well tough, things are changing, you can either help it along or get left behind. Oooh, things change Nobody's holding on because Nothing stays the same Oooh, things change Time passes by so fast Keep out of the rain I'm not Anti-Social,I just don't like you.


	Reply to Topic
Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.