Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 13:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
For starters I do not think that this idea is a panacea for cloaking problems, but i just want to throw it out there for others to see. It might spawn better ideas perhaps.
Make cloaked ships semi-scannable - as in cloaked ship generates 1000+ km anomaly sphere in the system that either can't be scanned to 100% or has random warp in location - Therefore people wont be able to simply scan warp in and decloak the target.
It is provides the basic location of the cloaked ship in space - and if it starts warping somewhere the sphere will move. Allowing these, who pay attention to notice the incoming threat. While if you slack off - well tough luck.
It might be also a good idea to merge the "anomalous sphere"-s of multiple ships into one - thus denying easy intel to the scanner.
Also might be a good idea to utilize upgraded module that comes with it's own set of draw-backs to offset the bonus ability (more skills, tighter fitting, less power) to keep it more for situational use.
What do you guys think? |
Belshazzar Babylon
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 13:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Negative Ghostrider the pattern is full. |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 16:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
And I wasn't asking a yes or no. I wanted to start a discussion, especially since I've personally agreed this isnt a cure. I wouldn't have posted this in F&I otherwise. |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
265
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 16:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Eidric wrote: What do you guys think?
I think to solve the problems of Cloaking you must remove Local Chat Intel. Until that happens CovOps ships can never properly fill their role.
I also think if as your post suggests a method of cloak detection is added to the game without first removing Local, CCP might as well remove cloaks from the game altogether as they would be useless.
|
Belshazzar Babylon
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 16:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
I'm sorry, it's just that this comes up about once a week. Usually the same ideas, either a special ship or probe that can find cloakies, or fuel/mechanic that makes cloakies uncloak after some arbitrary amount of time.
Then people argue and say that cloaks need a counter. Then other folks say that the counter is that cloaks can not do anything to you, or that Local is the problem.
I fall in the second category because I believe it would break WH's. I also find it funny that somehow one guy can scare up a whole system. |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 17:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
2 Xorv
I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.
No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.
2 Belshazzar Babylon
Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.
P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate. |
Astroniomix
EliteTroll
56
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 17:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Eidric wrote:2 Xorv
I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.
No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.
2 Belshazzar Babylon
Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.
P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate. Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table. |
Byrrssa Crendraven
Shadow Knight Industries
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 19:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Eidric wrote:2 Xorv
I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.
No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.
2 Belshazzar Babylon
Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.
P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate. Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table.
I find it hard to believe that *EVERYTHING* has been suggested. There can always be something that someone hasn't thought about. That's why you keep a discussion going. So that maybe someone that has that rare idea that fits can suggest it.
|
Astroniomix
EliteTroll
56
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 19:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Byrrssa Crendraven wrote:Astroniomix wrote:Eidric wrote:2 Xorv
I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.
No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.
2 Belshazzar Babylon
Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.
P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate. Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table. I find it hard to believe that *EVERYTHING* has been suggested. There can always be something that someone hasn't thought about. That's why you keep a discussion going. So that maybe someone that has that rare idea that fits can suggest it. I can't think of anything that hasn't been posted. Use the search, you will be amazed at some of the ideas. (my favorite is that cloaked ships should self destruct 30 seconds after cloaking)
|
Tidurious
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
210
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 19:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Belshazzar Babylon wrote:Negative Ghostrider the OP is stupid.
Fixed that for you.
NO. |
|
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 20:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tidurious wrote:Belshazzar Babylon wrote:Negative Ghostrider the OP is stupid. Fixed that for you. NO.
No what? did you read my question? or you just read the topic and answered w/o reading? |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7403
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 20:48:00 -
[12] - Quote
Been suggested before and no thanks.
While ever local remains the 100%, risk free, instant intel tool it is now, cloaking shouldn't be touched. If it ever is messed with in any way, then WH dwellers need to be taken into account. WH peeps don't whine about cloaks, they deal with them. Unlike renters and pet alliances.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Glorious Revolution The 99 Percent
77
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 21:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
Oh, and please add negrep and hide threads with -10 negrep in the OP. That way threads like this will be easier to deal with.
Oh, and OP, l2search!
OP, click me please! ^if you click it, you'll see about a few hundred threads similar to this. You'll also see why your idea is terrible. |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 22:03:00 -
[14] - Quote
2 Mag's
- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.
Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example.
2 Tikktokk Tokkzikk
And what made you think I didn't ? I did look up the search, but i haven't seen the suggestions similar to mine. That is why i added it to the discussion. And if you think this topic can't be discussed at all - what is the point of this forum then?
2 All
As I've stated in the 1st message * I do not think that is the solution* It was merely given as an example.
|
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
265
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 02:33:00 -
[15] - Quote
Eidric wrote:2 Xorv I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.
No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.
Nothing you said there really makes sense to me.
You're telling me that you have "no qualms about cloaking" yourself, but decided to start a new thread that claims cloaking is a problem and go on to suggest a nerf by means of detection mechanics. You're either very confused or lying.
You're not suggesting "a mid way point", there's no compromise in your proposal, it's just a nerf to CovOps. A compromise would address the problems of CovOps pilots and players as well, and that means doing something about Local Chat!
You also seem to have mind reading powers when it comes to CCP developers, in that you're convinced they will never remove/change Local, but would be happy to destroy cloaking by adding a detection method without addressing the Local issue. You are aware that CCP mentioned changing Local in the last CSM 6 minutes along with cloak detection?
|
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
Xorv wrote: Nothing you said there really makes sense to me.
You're telling me that you have "no qualms about cloaking" yourself, but decided to start a new thread that claims cloaking is a problem and go on to suggest a nerf by means of detection mechanics. You're either very confused or lying.
I have no personal problems with cloaking but i do see threads coming up once in a while. And I simply thought this idea might spawn some discussion by slightly nerfing cloakys but still keeping them invulnerable, and perhaps getting a counter balanced by something else that cloak pilots might enjoy.
Xorv wrote: You're not suggesting "a mid way point", there's no compromise in your proposal, it's just a nerf to CovOps. A compromise would address the problems of CovOps pilots and players as well, and that means doing something about Local Chat!
This:
Eidric wrote: P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.
And I've also wanted others to provide counter balance to my offer instead of saying yes or no. Especially since I dont have very solid counter balance myself as such I've did not included it in my original post. Hence i've said that the idea isn't complete. And i've really liked that combination you proposed of this slight nerf to cloak + removed local.
Xorv wrote: You also seem to have mind reading powers when it comes to CCP developers, in that you're convinced they will never remove/change Local, but would be happy to destroy cloaking by adding a detection method without addressing the Local issue. You are aware that CCP mentioned changing Local in the last CSM 6 minutes along with cloak detection?
I did not said CCP wont do it - I said I am afraid they won't because they are spending man-hours currently to improve handling of local UI. - Unless of course the local UI improvements they are implementing will be for Empire only. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
203
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
no. cloak is fine and does not need any nerfs. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7404
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:57:00 -
[18] - Quote
Eidric wrote:2 Mag's
- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.
Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example. For any idea to be viable, there needs to be balance. Yours misses the mark in that regard. Plus as has been said, your idea is nothing new and only breaks cloaking.
As Xorv said, you're either confused or lying.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
237
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 14:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
People just seem to forget the original reason for cloaking.
Someone wants the element of surprise, is willing to train for it extensively, and even use a ship with limited combat abilities.
Local absolutely denies this. But in a twisted yet balancing manner, the cloak is bizarrely also an absolute, not allowing any to locate those who use it correctly.
Another described it: I feel in this case being balanced is not reflecting the best of both sides, but equally screwed up on both sides.
This means cloaking is broken, regarding it's original purpose of intent. What's left was an improvised meta-gaming tactic salvaged from the situation.
Fix cloaking.
And that means both sides of the issue. |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 17:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Eidric wrote:2 Mag's
- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.
Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example. For any idea to be viable, there needs to be balance. Yours misses the mark in that regard. Plus as has been said, your idea is nothing new and only breaks cloaking. As Xorv said, you're either confused or lying.
Please read #16
And even in #6 I suggested nerfed local as balance to this idea. Have you read it?
I want you to help me find a decent balancing option to this problem - I am not trying to push this idea into game as is even I know it wouldn't be fair. |
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7405
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 18:42:00 -
[21] - Quote
Eidric wrote:Please read #16 No.
Eidric wrote:And even in #6 I suggested nerfed local as balance to this idea. Have you read it? Yes.
Eidric wrote:I want you to help me find a decent balancing option to this problem - I am not trying to push this idea into game as is even I know it wouldn't be fair. What problem?
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 19:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
You are addressing a non existent balance issue.
Balance exists. It may not be what you want, but that does not make it unbalanced.
As balance must be maintained for gameplay to be worthwhile, any suggestion that ignores half the equation will probably be shot down by Mag's
He does that. |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 12:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote:You are addressing a non existent balance issue.
Balance exists. It may not be what you want, but that does not make it unbalanced.
As balance must be maintained for gameplay to be worthwhile, any suggestion that ignores half the equation will probably be shot down by Mag's
He does that.
And i wanted others to contribute to the discussion by providing counter balance.
Unfortunately everyone and especially Mag's got stuck with an idea that my proposition was in final form and does not need to be readjusted in any way. If it was I would've posted it on Assembly Hall.
Here I've come for two way discussion that could potentially result in some constructive ideas. But right now beyond Xorv there was little actual feedback.
|
El Geo
Pathfinders. Mining For Profit Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 12:37:00 -
[24] - Quote
well thats the things, people who use stargates/stations SHOULD show up in local but if they enter through a wormhole or cyno (maybe just blops) they shouldnt
my vote is on the idea of new destroyer or new destroyer module that can use the directional scanner like sonar to detect cloaked ships and fire some sort of decloaking disruption device (obviously the cloaked pilot would get some visual and audio signals to make him aware someone is looking for him) which would make it more cat and mouse than it is now
but thats just me (and yes this has been suggested many times, but i love the idea so vov) |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 12:50:00 -
[25] - Quote
What about log in ? Because then people would just enter the system and relogin right away. In effect this would make same delayed local, but with constant relogining.
Surprise cloaking is great and should be implemented in the game but not in the way that allows a person to always kill it's target.
I would think the best idea would be two way surprise gank. With delayed local and cloak a ship can easily get in and capture it's prey. While at the same time Via another mechanic the prey might either find the cloaky (that doesnt even show on the local) or gather information about his activity - denying the kill or acting as a bait. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 13:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
Eidric wrote:And i wanted others to contribute to the discussion by providing counter balance.
Unfortunately everyone and especially Mag's got stuck with an idea that my proposition was in final form and does not need to be readjusted in any way. If it was I would've posted it on Assembly Hall.
Here I've come for two way discussion that could potentially result in some constructive ideas. But right now beyond Xorv there was little actual feedback. Don't get me wrong, I am not against debating this topic, I just want to skip ahead past the inevitable realizations of what needs to happen on both sides. Then we can move forward.
Otherwise this thread becomes a metaphor for the movie 'Groundhog Day', where we keep doing the same thing over and over.
Here is what we have, generalized, with solutions on both sides. No solution is perfect, and you need to give up on making everyone happy.
Focus on two important details, you will need them to move this forward. 1 It must be balanced for gameplay. Messed up as it is, the current system actually is balanced. We are here in this thread because we dislike it enough to consider other options. 2 It MUST be liked better than the current system.
That said, here is where many other threads eventually reach: Part 1; The trade off. Dump at least cloaked ships out of local. They don't belong there unless they want to be seen, and they can chatter away if that's the case. Enable an auto-cycle of the D-Scan, with the following details: It can detect if a cloaked vessel enters it's range, but cannot determine location or number. It shuts off when you enter warp. It shuts off when you do a system change, by any means. One exception, the ships designed to probe are able to have it run nonstop even when warping. (This would include any ship with bonuses to probing)
Part 2; Hunt the hunters. Use probes designed to hunt cloaked ships. Specialty item, T2. The probes can decloak ships by either proximity, or by getting on grid with ships they have tracked, and pulsing an inverted energy wave to the cloaked vessel's power frequency. The cloaked vessel cannot reengage their cloak until they get off grid with the probe. Stopping them is the hunter's problem. The probe just creates an opportunity if used right. (Gate camps won't find this very useful, as probing down the newly arrived cloaked vessel will allow the vessel in question to leave before it completes.) |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 14:30:00 -
[27] - Quote
Thank you Nikk
I also would like to see more a trade off though since the current system is balanced more or less if we wish to modify it we do need to modify both parts
Cloaked ship most important asset is information, and that information comes with a trade off: if pilot wants to scan a ship in random space location (not anomalys) it needs to release probes that also relay information to everyone that some activity is happening
Matter of fact is in WH's especially in high level ones, where people know what to look for, cloaked ships can only be really hidden when they have been inside the system for a long time and without known WH connection. This makes current cloak absolutely great for wormholes: If you want the element of surprise up until you decloak you have to sacrifice the firepower (no open hole to throw the gank through).
Usually the WH dwellers know when a new hole opens within their system.
As such even in WH it is possible to achieve a semi-reseblance of information about local ships, What makes us different is that we do not know who, how much and where enters our system. (+ random holes ofc)
And all that information is gathered manually
What I think would be viable is "no local" of course to provide the element of surprise, but we do need to know that cloaked ship in K-space can have much more "firepower" attached to it. Due to permanent gates, Cyno's etc
As such the information it gathers in K-space is much more valuable and "no local" has to be countered above the WH level.
But at the same time we should try not to boost the WH scan because that would nerf WH cloaking too much which atm is actually perfect
So to summarize all that i've just writte
* K-space modifications should come with K-space only drawback
* No local - is information and at best should be countered via some other information achievable by defenders. (Manually not automatically) to achieve balance similar to WH
* Information can be countered by decreasing *total* offensive capabilities of the cloaky (Total means cynos\gangs on other side etc) For example Cyno-jammers do in fact make cloaked less powerful in that system simply by limiting the maximum firepower
That is why i wanted that cripple-scan to show approximate location of the cloaked ship - to balace the information with information |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 16:11:00 -
[28] - Quote
Eidric wrote:So to summarize all that i've just writte
* K-space modifications should come with K-space only drawback
* No local - is information and at best should be countered via some other information achievable by defenders. (Manually not automatically) to achieve balance similar to WH
* Information can be countered by decreasing *total* offensive capabilities of the cloaky (Total means cynos\gangs on other side etc) For example Cyno-jammers do in fact make cloaked less powerful in that system simply by limiting the maximum firepower
That is why i wanted that cripple-scan to show approximate location of the cloaked ship - to balace the information with information My thoughts:
K- Space: I would suggest leaving local mostly intact, for the reason you gave already. You can have more and bigger ships, which are not intended to enjoy secrecy regarding their being present.
No Local? A lot of players are simply not prepared for a change on that level. Local has weakened their ability to self-gather intel by handing it to them for free... you might say it domesticated them. They would need to adapt back into the 'wild'. People do not like being told they have to work harder to stay at the level they felt they had already earned.
Cyno's and intel gathering should be mutually exclusive, in my opinion. I feel no ship should be able to mount both a probe launcher and a cyno generator at the same time. I think it is overpowered.
As for cloaked ship awareness, my balance idea addressed this on two levels. The D-scan gives you an area they are in, and you can narrow that down by reducing the area scanned. It will always answer yes or no to their presence. How you use that information is up to you. The T2 probes, meant to actually hunt cloaked vessels with, take it to the offensive level more directly. It makes it specific enough to still show cloaks respect due their efforts, but makes it possible to find them, and fight against them. |
Quade Warren
Urban Mining Corp Rising Phoenix Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 17:11:00 -
[29] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote:Eidric wrote:So to summarize all that i've just writte
* K-space modifications should come with K-space only drawback
* No local - is information and at best should be countered via some other information achievable by defenders. (Manually not automatically) to achieve balance similar to WH
* Information can be countered by decreasing *total* offensive capabilities of the cloaky (Total means cynos\gangs on other side etc) For example Cyno-jammers do in fact make cloaked less powerful in that system simply by limiting the maximum firepower
That is why i wanted that cripple-scan to show approximate location of the cloaked ship - to balace the information with information My thoughts: K- Space: I would suggest leaving local mostly intact, for the reason you gave already. You can have more and bigger ships, which are not intended to enjoy secrecy regarding their being present. No Local? A lot of players are simply not prepared for a change on that level. Local has weakened their ability to self-gather intel by handing it to them for free... you might say it domesticated them. They would need to adapt back into the 'wild'. People do not like being told they have to work harder to stay at the level they felt they had already earned. Cyno's and intel gathering should be mutually exclusive, in my opinion. I feel no ship should be able to mount both a probe launcher and a cyno generator at the same time. I think it is overpowered. As for cloaked ship awareness, my balance idea addressed this on two levels. The D-scan gives you an area they are in, and you can narrow that down by reducing the area scanned. It will always answer yes or no to their presence. How you use that information is up to you. The T2 probes, meant to actually hunt cloaked vessels with, take it to the offensive level more directly. It makes it specific enough to still show cloaks respect due their efforts, but makes it possible to find them, and fight against them.
If this was a natural evolution in terms of combat, then those that liked to sit cloaked would develop a counter. Since you're free beaming information via probe back to a location, shouldn't they get a module that gives up the location of the hunter?
The development of a technique to hunt cloaked ships without giving the cloaked ships any ability to fight back means that you've really only shifted the weight to the hunter. Now hunters are nearly invulnerable because as wormhole space has taught me, if I see a probe on dscan I need to leave immediately, not sit and wait unless I'm baiting. That's all this would do.
If the hunter can probe me out, I think the cloaked ship should be allowed a module that triangulates the person spewing seven probes into space and beaming information constantly between them.
Make the game of cat and mouse reciprocal, don't invent another cat.
|
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
238
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 17:34:00 -
[30] - Quote
Quade Warren wrote:If this was a natural evolution in terms of combat, then those that liked to sit cloaked would develop a counter. Since you're free beaming information via probe back to a location, shouldn't they get a module that gives up the location of the hunter?
The development of a technique to hunt cloaked ships without giving the cloaked ships any ability to fight back means that you've really only shifted the weight to the hunter. Now hunters are nearly invulnerable because as wormhole space has taught me, if I see a probe on dscan I need to leave immediately, not sit and wait unless I'm baiting. That's all this would do.
If the hunter can probe me out, I think the cloaked ship should be allowed a module that triangulates the person spewing seven probes into space and beaming information constantly between them.
Make the game of cat and mouse reciprocal, don't invent another cat. I am not clear on what you mean by 'sit cloaked'. AFK cloaking is effectively made obsolete by this, so you would need to broadcast your presence in order to duplicate that. If that's your goal, learn to move around a lot.
If you are flat gathering intel, good news. With noone actually aware you are present, they have no direct reason to hunt you. I would d-scan every so often for probes, and stay in a deep safe so your ship doesn't trigger someone else's d-scan.
If you are probing, then you need to be mindful to watch for probes that are not yours. Good news, your probes will probably find theirs. Cat and mouse begins.
Cloaking should be suspense filled. Did they spot you? They worry you are about to gank them somehow... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |