EVE Search - Cloaker, to be or fix

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Cloaker, to be or fix

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lacey Black Amarr Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.06 21:44:00 - [1] Edited by: Lacey Black on 06/05/2009 21:45:26 I see nothing wrong with the cloak system except I believe it is a bit oneside that needs some balance. Using the cloak on ships is legal, usefull to a degree but also can be a pain. I think CCP needs to develop a PROBE that can detect the emission generated by a cloaked ship. This gives defenders a chance to find the cloaked vessel. This would help with that silly individual that goes afk cloaked or a chance to find that bomber pilot that just blew your ore cans to dust. Or at least the cloak drain Cap or has to run a cycle that has to be restarted manualy. I think cloaking needs to be readdressed & balanced. Even in the real world a F-117 stealth fighter-bomber can be found, ask the USAF they lost one becasue it was detected. So there should be some balance as well in the Eve world with them as well.
Faife Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.06 21:47:00 - [2] Quote: I see nothing wrong with the cloak system... i agree. /thread --
Chief Simpson Minmatar Sanitation Worker's Union of Null Sec	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:05:00 - [3] I also agree. There is nothing wrong with the cloak system. Leave it alone. It hurts no one. Now, if we could just hold hands while cloaked and sing "C'est un petit monde", then you would feel better. ----------- Cleaning up the garbage in null sec, one belt at a time...
Grek Forto Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:07:00 - [4] Nothing wrong with cloaks as I see it. A cloaker can do no harm if he's AFK anyways. Originally by: Stitcher It's "Caldari", not "Caldarians". One Caldari, three Caldari, all the Caldari are doing Caldari things using Caldari tools in a Caldari way.
Lonzo Kincaid Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:11:00 - [5] appears that Sev3rance are unable to coordinate together enough to provide cover for ratters in a system that has some guy who might surprise one of them if he's even fit to blow stuff up to begin with. ---------------------- Quote: The rule of thumb is you have to outnumber them 2:1 before you even think about engaging them
Quantar Raalsken Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:12:00 - [6] Originally by: Chief Simpson I also agree. There is nothing wrong with the cloak system. Leave it alone. It hurts no one. Now, if we could just hold hands while cloaked and sing "C'est un petit monde", then you would feel better. ever hear of the six levels of separation? that **** is serious business O_O ======= Homeworld Hamachi Network
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:12:00 - [7] The only change I would make would to be the ability to detect (not decloak, a binary there is or isn't a cloaked ship within 100KM) cloaked ships within 100KM, Prehaps a module, or using the scanner. not a big deal, but it'd be nice.
Grek Forto Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:15:00 - [8] Edited by: Grek Forto on 06/05/2009 22:15:20 Originally by: Lacey Black I think cloaking needs to be readdressed & balanced. Even in the real world a F-117 stealth fighter-bomber can be found, ask the USAF they lost one becasue it was detected. So there should be some balance as well in the Eve world with them as well. Also, this is BS. Because... ...cloaking in EVE = You make the ship invisible to everything, but can't do anything yourself. ..."cloaking" in real life is only (if we're talking about the F-117) the ability to be undetectable on radar. Rule # 1, don't justify that something should be changed in EVE based on the fact that "It doesn't function like that in real life". It's called Science-Fiction for a reason. Bolded the most important part. Edit: Spelling Originally by: Stitcher It's "Caldari", not "Caldarians". One Caldari, three Caldari, all the Caldari are doing Caldari things using Caldari tools in a Caldari way.
Quantar Raalsken Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:17:00 - [9] Originally by: Grek Forto Edited by: Grek Forto on 06/05/2009 22:15:20 Also, this is BS. Because... ...cloaking in EVE = You make the ship invisible to everything, but can't do anything yourself. force recon, SB, and covops ======= Homeworld Hamachi Network
Grek Forto Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:19:00 - [10] Originally by: Quantar Raalsken Originally by: Grek Forto Edited by: Grek Forto on 06/05/2009 22:15:20 Also, this is BS. Because... ...cloaking in EVE = You make the ship invisible to everything, but can't do anything yourself. force recon, SB, and covops Heh, true that. But as it stands. When cloaked, they can only scout. They pose no threat to the people in the system. Scouting could be done in a shuttle too, a bit less safe. But wth, isn't it fun to have some "unusual stuff" in the game, like cloaks. Originally by: Stitcher It's "Caldari", not "Caldarians". One Caldari, three Caldari, all the Caldari are doing Caldari things using Caldari tools in a Caldari way.
Quantar Raalsken Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:20:00 - [11] Edited by: Quantar Raalsken on 06/05/2009 22:21:52 Edited by: Quantar Raalsken on 06/05/2009 22:21:28 Originally by: Grek Forto Originally by: Quantar Raalsken Originally by: Grek Forto Edited by: Grek Forto on 06/05/2009 22:15:20 Also, this is BS. Because... ...cloaking in EVE = You make the ship invisible to everything, but can't do anything yourself. force recon, SB, and covops edit: usually Heh, true that. But as it stands. When cloaked, they can only scout. They pose no threat to the people in the system. Scouting could be done in a shuttle too, a bit less safe. But wth, isn't it fun to have some "unusual stuff" in the game, like cloaks. when they show up in ur overview all of a sudden ur already ****ed.... edit: usually ======= Homeworld Hamachi Network
Hyveres Caldari	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:21:00 - [12] Edited by: Hyveres on 06/05/2009 22:22:46 You mean the classic DD , safespot , cloak that makes a certain type of ship easy to survive with. Or the good ole cloaked Raven ratters and various other kind of hiding in annoying ways. As I see it the normal cloak should simply give -90% signal strength if people try to scan you down, while the covop cloak can function like it currently does. This means a cloaked ship is hell to locate , a covop is covert but people trying to hide in big ships will be discovered. Heck from what a lot of people are saying the cloaking mechanics is one reason why so few titans are killed even if their DD misses when they face the 10 minute timer which "should" be making them vulnerable. "Subtlety is a thing for philosophy, not combat. If you're going to kill someone, you might as well kill them a whole lot." - Vulcan Raven, The Last Days Of Foxhound
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:22:00 - [13] Edited by: TraininVain on 06/05/2009 22:22:45 As I understand this the issue basically is the ability to be "safe" while doing something solo in 0.0 space. Should you ever be "safe" ratting solo in 0.0? edit Those guys who insta-safe and cloak are using third party tools. That needs fixing.
Grek Forto Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:23:00 - [14] Originally by: Quantar Raalsken when they show up in ur overview all of a sudden ur already **ed.... Meh, adds another dimension to combat. Well, someone can scan you down, be a bit lucky and then they are also in your overview. Besides, how many combat ships can actually fit Covert Ops cloaks? Originally by:** Stitcher It's "Caldari", not "Caldarians". One Caldari, three Caldari, all the Caldari are doing Caldari things using Caldari tools in a Caldari way.
Hyveres Caldari	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:24:00 - [15] Originally by: Grek Forto Originally by: Quantar Raalsken when they show up in ur overview all of a sudden ur already ****ed.... Meh, adds another dimension to combat. Well, someone can scan you down, be a bit lucky and then they are also in your overview. Besides, how many combat ships can actually fit Covert Ops cloaks? All T3 ships , all recons , stealthbombers afaik. "Subtlety is a thing for philosophy, not combat. If you're going to kill someone, you might as well kill them a whole lot." - Vulcan Raven, The Last Days Of Foxhound
Herzog Wolfhammer	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:25:00 - [16] Based on some other threads I have seen, rather than a complaint approach, why not a solution that adds to game play. First I have to say that I started using cloaks because of "probe jackers". I have found that when warping to a anomoly found with Core Scanners, and even the more difficult ones that take skills to find, some tard with only enough skill for combat scanners sees a ship "in the middle of nowhere" and warps to it, and basically steals the site. I do a lot of scanning, but stay in a NPC corp because every time I noticed that the probe jackers use heavy hitters and if I was in a corp, I know my exploration fit BC would be toast. So I just pass the information on to my "honorary" corp. But Combat Scanners won't find that radar site or a weak cosmic, and if I cloak while sitting on it waiting for the corp to arrive with the hacking mods or larger ships (for WH space), the site won't be hijacked. But like I said, let's improve it. Rather than a probe that totally defeats the purpose of a cloak, not only for my purposes but the many applications of PVP, come up with new stuff that can have limited use against cloaks, and even more stuff that helps. How about some changes that make things interesting, like a "localized radar scanner" for a ship fit that can pick up in that gap where Combat Probes leave off. I suppose a stationary radar platform would also be good for large corps in 0.0 space. Of course, further stealth mods and skills to engance cloak and the like would be nice for the cloaker. More modules, more skills, and perhaps a new class of support ship all about scanning and probing too. It could make for some interesting game play - you would feel like a Submarine captain in "Hunt for Red October". Heck, runnnign silent and deep could even become part of the vocabulary. I would even hope for "decoy drones" too to throw off a search and destroy team or a combat patrol. Chaff and flare would also be nice. But that's for a whish list perhaps.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:37:00 - [17] Sized cloaks? Battlecruiser and up start using fuel. runs and cloaks -------- Ideas for: Mining
Quantar Raalsken Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:37:00 - [18] Originally by: Hyveres Originally by: Grek Forto Originally by: Quantar Raalsken when they show up in ur overview all of a sudden ur already ****ed.... Meh, adds another dimension to combat. Well, someone can scan you down, be a bit lucky and then they are also in your overview. Besides, how many combat ships can actually fit Covert Ops cloaks? All T3 ships , all recons , stealthbombers afaik. only force recon, not combat recon...but still a lot of pirates use Pilgrims ======= Homeworld Hamachi Network
ZinderX500 Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:53:00 - [19] Originally by: Lacey Black Even in the real world a F-117 stealth fighter-bomber can be found, ask the USAF they lost one becasue it was detected. So there should be some balance as well in the Eve world with them as well. You brutally failed.
Hame leGrey Valklear Guard Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:57:00 - [20] Eve does not equal real world. Leave the cloaks as they are.
Lacey Black Amarr Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.06 23:19:00 - [21] I still believe atool needs to be made where they can be detected. Nothnig should be totally invisible, everything has a weakness.
Corduroy Rab Chaos Reborn Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.05.06 23:39:00 - [22] I agree large space holding alliance ratters should be able to operate totally risk free.
Selia Evrion Gallente Night-Stalkerz Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive	Posted - 2009.05.06 23:40:00 - [23] You mean the delay to locking time? Or the fact that those ships without a delay to locking time are now only good against Battleships... And when there's twenty of them? Like you said, nothing wrong with cloaks. Also, change the exploration probe visual effect back. The circles make me want to go out and murder someone. desusigs
Intense Thinker Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.06 23:41:00 - [24] I think cloaks need a boost, stealth bombers should be able to release a bomb without dropping cloak Pomp FTW!!!
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.07 00:07:00 - [25] it is easy to catch cloakers, you just need to think outside the box.... for example. this is how a group of mine caught a cloakerratter one day ..... we all warped into a system with ratters , the ratters warped and cloaked, nothing un useual there. we hid a cloaking dictor pilot in the belt he was last using and then waited a system out where they had no scout. took 10 minutes or so but we knew he would start back ratting ratter came back in , dictor pilot de cloaked dropped a bubble .... ratter going no where , and then got ganked by 5 commandships :) cant find KM sorry cloaking is fine it just your in-adaptability to come up with a solution, another great one from zombeh ( OMG why did you go to KIA ) a old corp mate was if you being chased by recon cloaking and warping scouting your group for enemy intellegence. get someone to set up a bubble in between the warp path of 2 gates , one your comming from and one your going to , SS half way though and warp back . ahead of the group say the next 2 systems ahead. while your being chased you warp and jump into the system with the bubble, you warp to the gate that the bubble is in between , you get snagged in the bubble , everyone then realses there drones once they have landed. if they recon was following you he will then shortly uncloak on the bubble with all the drones there , lock him web him point him and kill him . resulting kill is here as shown in these to demonstrations, there is nothing wrong with catching cloking, stop being lazy and actually think about stragity if you buy eve in a box from my game store i will give you isk (GAME , parkgate rotherham)
Max Queso	Posted - 2009.05.07 00:11:00 - [26] If you can detect a cloaked ship, then it's not a cloaked ship. If you're nervous about some afk cloaker floating around in your ratting system,.. find another system.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.07 00:13:00 - [27] OMG the secret AFK peoples will bubble and kill me even though they arnt there.... or are they ? if you buy eve in a box from my game store i will give you isk (GAME , parkgate rotherham)
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.05.07 00:26:00 - [28] When people need to leave the game for real life reasons, they have 2 choices: 1) cloak at safe spot 2) log out at safe spot (or station) What is the fundamental difference between the 2 options? It is the local chat When people use option #2, local chat instantly provides valuable information about player status. Local chat should not be used this way. There should be no difference between option #1 and #2. The proper solution here is the nerf local so there is no difference. So unless you also want to have a special probe that can find offline pilots in space to pop their ships, you shouldn't argue for finding cloaked pilots at safe spots. I am not against having some in-grid method of checking cloakers tho. If a cloaked ship is in your grid, we could have some slow way of finding them, without it being overpowered.
Thalia Kell	Posted - 2009.05.07 00:44:00 - [29] What eve needs is a negative impact on sensors when you are cloaked. Its just stupid that no one can see you, but you can see just perfect. Im not only talking about the ship scanner, but also about visual sight.
Nicyra Amarr	Posted - 2009.05.07 01:01:00 - [30] Originally by: Thalia Kell What eve needs is a negative impact on sensors when you are cloaked. Its just stupid that no one can see you, but you can see just perfect. Im not only talking about the ship scanner, but also about visual sight. I agree with the ship scanner. No accuracy with cloaking 1, add 15% per level until 60% at 5. Covops has 20%, recon ships have 20% more on top of that. ------------------------------------------------ I am a Khanid fighting for the Minmatar. I lurk in Minmatar channel. No, you cannot have my autograph.
Marcus Xavier Minmatar Xavier Institute for Higher Learning	Posted - 2009.05.07 01:09:00 - [31] Originally by: Thalia Kell What eve needs is a negative impact on sensors when you are cloaked. Its just stupid that no one can see you, but you can see just perfect. Im not only talking about the ship scanner, but also about visual sight. Yeah, it's too much like real life. Just because passive sonar on a submarine can identify ships from miles away doesn't mean that Eve should emulate it. ---------------- Mutatis Mutandis
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.07 03:16:00 - [32] Another cloak-whine thread? Is this a theme today? Already balanced - doesn't need fixing. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
greeny knight Amarr Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.07 05:04:00 - [33] Originally by: Hame leGrey Eve does not equal real world. Leave the cloaks as they are. otherwise you need to start to play right. years ago i made propositions to change the cloacking system , years its a pain in the b*t as it is , it is unreal that a ship can stay cloacked all day , exept for the specialized ones sb cov op recons , if you read the descriptipn of the mod proto cloack or inproved cloack . "module creates high sensor disruption while fitted and can not operate unless at minimum velocity." you can have a probe or module to counteract that . it is realy anoying when in system a red is there all day afk and you can't find that bloody guy . just add to combatprobes the ability to have a remote chance to find cloaclers exept the ones who can fir cov op cloack Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected])
Ron Bacardi SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.07 06:43:00 - [34] Originally by: Lacey Black Edited by: Lacey Black on 06/05/2009 21:45:26 I see nothing wrong with the cloak... + words I disagree...the in-flight movie sucks tonight.
Kyrghiz	Posted - 2009.05.07 07:07:00 - [35] Originally by: Lacey Black ... everything has a weakness. You mean like -75% velocity penalty, -40% scan resolution bonus and not being able to warp? Personally I don't care what happen's to cloaking if it is nerfed or not, but somehow i miss the point in nerfing crappy ships (force recons, covert ops) into more crappy ships. Or nerfing crappy equipment, which annoys entire fittings because it eats up more CPU than any of my guns. Also i dont see why a counter (cloaking) for a specific system (probing) needs a counter, making itself useless. But then again i dont care about cloaks since i nerver used them.
Glengrant TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 09:26:00 - [36] I think that cloaking is mostly fine as it is. You cannot lock or fire while cloaked - and hardly can use any modules. Plus - except for covops ships (which are specialized, small and fragile) - fitting a cloak gimps your ship. The only change that I would welcome is a special cloak detector probe that can find covops ship - but hard to use and needs a long time and never gets a perfect reading or provide something lockable (would need to (smart-)bomb the area or fly around until you bump it into visibility). The typical time to find a cloaked ship with that should be no less than 15-30 minutes and even that will be useless if the cloaker warps once in a while (i.e. - is online). Thus the only practical use would be to find and perhaps destroy afk cloakers. Having an effect in game while being afk should be discouraged - or at least not without its own risks. Anything beyond that would make cloaking useless. If there's a probe that allows you to target cloaked ships quickly then cloaking would become useless. You only need a few specialized scouts (assuming it needs high skills - but high skills can hardly ever be a balancing factor anyway) to make cloaking utterly useless. --- Save the forum: Think before you post. ISK BUYER = LOSER EVE TV- Bring it back! Laptop, NVidia7900GS, Ubuntu 8.04, WINE
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.07 09:59:00 - [37] Fix cloaking: Remove uncloaking delay Remove scan res penalty Remove uncloaking near objects Remove no warping whilst cloaked Add a probe that can with difficulty detect cloaked ships Add a decloaking bomb Add fuel for cloaks. Add % fitting for cloak +10% cpu +10% pg reasons Losing 1 high slot and the pg + cpu to fit it is very expensive already. Ganking Buddhist Nun
Neamus	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:48:00 - [38] I vote to leave cloaking alone, its fine as it is...
Muaina Naura	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:54:00 - [39] Funny how others argue about how no one should be 100% safe so cloaks are okay. What is really annoying is ratters safing and cloaking the moment someone enters their local. But then again they would just log off if cloaking would not be 100% safe but then there would be atleast 1 minute to probe the bugger. Prototype cloak is too easy to fit just about any ship.
Vincent Gaines Dirt Nap Squad	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:55:00 - [40] Originally by: Lonzo Kincaid appears that Sev3rance are unable to coordinate together enough to provide cover for ratters in a system that has some guy who might surprise one of them if he's even fit to blow stuff up to begin with. I assure you, this is truth.
Steppa Gallente Incognito Inc	Posted - 2009.05.07 12:18:00 - [41] A long time ago when I was living in deep 0.0, afk enemy cloakers really ****ed me off. Still do, in fact, as there's no counter. However it did lead to an idea that I would like to see implemented that would add a whole new dimension to the game; Cloaked ships can see other cloaked ships...complete with mods and weapons that can only operate while cloaked. Thus, theoretically, you could have an entire fleet engagement (with many new cloak-centric ships across all size hulls) of cloaked-equipped weapons raging right in front of you, but if you weren't cloaked, all you would see are unexplained explosions, people coming out of cloak when they get to close to something, cans appearing...etc.
Fox Ogmo Net 7 The Last Brigade	Posted - 2009.05.07 13:24:00 - [42] Originally by: Faife Quote: I see nothing wrong with the cloak system... i agree. /thread This thread ended long ago...
Silaq	Posted - 2009.05.07 13:26:00 - [43] Seems some of you should direct your complaining at local, not cloaks. I believe the devs have said a couple of times that they want to change (or do away with?) local for that very reason.
Warlin Gallente Theoretical Enterprises	Posted - 2009.05.07 13:31:00 - [44] clearly you've never seen professional cloak hunters - scary buggers, they fly around with smartbombs and they pass their drones from one member to another clearing a grid, very tough to avoid. Im gonna say the cloak system is fine the way it is, but if they really wanted make a cloak detection module that scanes nearby and can help you probe out a cloaker based on a distance reading - so you can play hot/cold rather than just being able to find and nail them w/ probes from anyplace, give it a range of like 100k? and lowsec/0.0 only? (to avoid the smartbomb like effect from 'hitting' other players)
Brizae	Posted - 2009.05.07 13:52:00 - [45] Originally by: Warlin clearly you've never seen professional cloak hunters Professional cloak hunter? That sounds like a lot of fun. I'll have to find out more about this profession. There is nothing wrong with the cloaking system the way it is now. The only fix need here is a nappy change for the QQ-ers.
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.07 13:55:00 - [46] SOMETHING needs to be done because the game has become nothing but cloakers and logoffskis. This is supposed to be a PvP game, but it just isn't when everyone runs around cloaked refusing to fight each other and only gank the occasional mining barge or ratter. Accomplishing that is all well and good as it is the entire purpose of these ships, but it should not be done with total and complete impunity. It used to be you fit up a ship and flew it deep into enemy territory and saw how much damage you could inflict before being blown up. Now everyone just fits a cloak and/or exploits the broken logoff mechanics and can come and go with ease, never getting killed. That is not PvP.
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.07 14:02:00 - [47] Originally by: Warlin clearly you've never seen professional cloak hunters - scary buggers, they fly around with smartbombs and they pass their drones from one member to another clearing a grid, very tough to avoid. That is like looking for a needle in a haystack and can only be done immediately after you see them jump into the system and thus, know about where they are. Even then it's a crap shoot. Originally by: Warlin Im gonna say the cloak system is fine the way it is, but if they really wanted make a cloak detection module that scanes nearby and can help you probe out a cloaker based on a distance reading - so you can play hot/cold rather than just being able to find and nail them w/ probes from anyplace, give it a range of like 100k? and lowsec/0.0 only? (to avoid the smartbomb like effect from 'hitting' other players) Yes, a depth charge like system would be fun, where you fly around blasting off smart bombs or launching the flying bombs in different directions with larger explosion radii trying to get lucky and decloak the enemy. A smart enemy would likely be able to avoid it just fine unless you get lucky, but at least you're doing SOMETHING and the enemy has to do something active himself to stay safe.
Ghoest	Posted - 2009.05.07 14:02:00 - [48] cry more op Wherever you went - Here you are.
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance Blackguard Coalition	Posted - 2009.05.07 14:12:00 - [49] Originally by: Hyveres Edited by: Hyveres on 06/05/2009 22:22:46 You mean the classic DD , safespot , cloak that makes a certain type of ship easy to survive with. Or the good ole cloaked Raven ratters and various other kind of hiding in annoying ways. As I see it the normal cloak should simply give -90% signal strength if people try to scan you down, while the covop cloak can function like it currently does. This means a cloaked ship is hell to locate , a covop is covert but people trying to hide in big ships will be discovered. Heck from what a lot of people are saying the cloaking mechanics is one reason why so few titans are killed even if their DD misses when they face the 10 minute timer which "should" be making them vulnerable. The ravens will just log instead of cloak.
MasterEnt	Posted - 2009.05.07 15:05:00 - [50] Funny - For some reason I was thinking about EVE Cloaking on my way to work this morning. As an Avid Covert Ops pilot, I agree that there needs to be a counter covert ops ability. This could happen a couple of ways. For one We would need some more cloaking skills and then some cloak detection skills. As for actual detection, maybe it should be limited to POS based modules that scan a sector, or only available to sovereign systems allowing scanning of the entire system.
Xennith Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.05.07 15:14:00 - [51] Just remove local and the problem goes away. For now I guess sitting AFK cloaked in Sev systems is an effective way to prevent you guys ratting? We come for our people
Rhadamantine Game Community	Posted - 2009.05.07 15:27:00 - [52] AFK cloaked ships are a valid warfare tool, as it plays mind games with those affected, hence the existence of this thread. An AFK cloaker has never killed anyone, or stopped any organised group from playing. If you find you cannot play, then you need to be more organised, Oh and comparing RL F-117's to Eve is fail. 'I see nothing wrong with the cloak system' is where you should have stopped tbh.
greeny knight Amarr Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.07 15:56:00 - [53] Originally by: Vincent Gaines Originally by: Lonzo Kincaid appears that Sev3rance are unable to coordinate together enough to provide cover for ratters in a system that has some guy who might surprise one of them if he's even fit to blow stuff up to begin with. I assure you, this is truth. our killbord shows a diff story , but that are active ones , thye goo BOOOOOOMMM once in a wile its the afk ones we have problems with , wonder when the sb cloacked tron stikes next , or the cov op with his cov op syno recovers in his clone bay of the shock Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected])
Drunk Driver Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.05.07 16:01:00 - [54] I like my cloaked ships. They scare peoples.
Corduroy Rab Chaos Reborn Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.05.07 16:01:00 - [55] Originally by: greeny knight Originally by: Vincent Gaines Originally by: Lonzo Kincaid appears that Sev3rance are unable to coordinate together enough to provide cover for ratters in a system that has some guy who might surprise one of them if he's even fit to blow stuff up to begin with. I assure you, this is truth. our killbord shows a diff story , but that are active ones , thye goo BOOOOOOMMM once in a wile its the afk ones we have problems with , wonder when the sb cloacked tron stikes next , or the cov op with his cov op syno recovers in his clone bay of the shock So when people are active you can handle them, but when they are afk and not playing you somehow cannot...
llhloiug	Posted - 2009.05.07 16:30:00 - [56] A cloak is an active module. It should drain capacitor like any other active module. Granted, there are some that don't drain much (i.e. DC), but this could be an optional way of limiting the time a pilot spends cloaked. I think the extended recloak penalty with the recent patch is a step in the right direction.
Kai'Ckul Caldari Solar Storm	Posted - 2009.05.07 19:14:00 - [57] As a tool for denying operations and for wasting manpower, cloak is surpassed by none in EVE. A cloaked SB BS could in essence stay in a system (or wormhole for that matter), for days, logged in, doing nothing, and forcing the owner of the system to either accept random losses, or wasting manpower keeping a guard force in system. Or for that matter, it could be a mothership or carrier, cloak works still. I have no problem with bombers, covops and recons being able to hide for prolonged periods of time. These ships are designed for it, and to larger or greater extend balanced for it. A bomber can pack a potent punch alright, but for its cost it is a fairly fragile ship. Recons the same. The skill invested in flying them and being actually able to kill stuff in them is also significant. That however is a far cry from slapping some bombs, inertia stabs, wcs and a cloak on a tier 1 bs, and pop by your computer every few hours just to see if the easy pickings present themselves. That doesnt take skill, just patience and a good book or movie. A couple of the suggested countermeasures sound interesting, but first and foremost: Cloaking must consume fuel on ships not designed spesifically for cloak. That puts it in line with other mods like siege and triage, which give you a significant bonus. And fuel consumption must be depending on the bulk of what you are trying to cloak. If you want to cloak a kestrel, that should consume far less fuel than if you try to cloak a megathron, or a carrier for that matter. To avoid carriers filling their maintenance bays with fuel, maintenance bay and ship hangar should be locked for movement while cloaked. There has been a lot of debates on how to detect cloakers, probes, POS arrays,or decloak bombs. POS arrays might be the best option, giving cloakers a harder time trying to infiltrate a heavily fortified system, than when they roam sparsely populated areas or supporting hunting OPs. Possibly a cumulative effect, forcing the defenders to invest in several large POS with scanner arrays pr system if they want to stand a chance at detecting cloakers. There is of course the tried and tested method aswell.... a large bubble along the warpin path, coupled with 1-2-3 bombships Doesn't work too well with NRDS tho oh.. And I find it rather strange that damage taken does not decloak you.... Your cloak is altering the shields is it not ? Incomming damage should also alter your shields somewhat ----------------------------------------------------- "You must not fight too often with your enemy or you will teach him all your art of war" - Napoleon Bonaparte
Kelly Dataminer	Posted - 2009.05.07 20:42:00 - [58] Originally by: Kai'Ckul Cloaking must consume fuel on ships not designed specifically for cloak. Would be completely in favor of this. The fact that you can cloak a titan completely without any chance of detection is ludicrous. Covops ships are made to be long term behind the lines ships and rigged specifically for this. Throwing a cloak on a non-covops without some kind of change to the ship, fuel requirements, or its structure and still allowing it to be undetectable is just ludicrous. Everything has a counter in this game (heck even cyno jammers have one now). Where's this one?
Corduroy Rab Chaos Reborn Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:24:00 - [59] Originally by: Kelly Dataminer Originally by: Kai'Ckul Cloaking must consume fuel on ships not designed specifically for cloak. Would be completely in favor of this. The fact that you can cloak a titan completely without any chance of detection is ludicrous. Covops ships are made to be long term behind the lines ships and rigged specifically for this. Throwing a cloak on a non-covops without some kind of change to the ship, fuel requirements, or its structure and still allowing it to be undetectable is just ludicrous. Everything has a counter in this game (heck even cyno jammers have one now). Where's this one? Let me start by saying that I do not agree with you in any way. That said, I do not think this is really going to be as much of an issue, since it seems to me that the future of 'afk' recon camps will likely not need as many conventional ships with cloaks. I envision it being more a lone 'afk' recon sitting lazily for hours, then once the residents start ratting/mining whatever, it tackles then pops a covert cyno and suddenly becomes a recon gang.
Vincent Gaines Dirt Nap Squad	Posted - 2009.05.07 22:53:00 - [60] Originally by: greeny knight wonder when the sb cloacked tron stikes next , or the cov op with his cov op syno recovers in his clone bay of the shock we're doing just fine i.e. drop in the bucket, and 'twas a fun few days I'm not a diplo/dir so not going to say any more.
Brizae	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:18:00 - [61] Originally by: Infinity Ziona Fix cloaking: Remove uncloaking delay Remove scan res penalty Remove uncloaking near objects Remove no warping whilst cloaked I can work with that. /signed
Kale Kold Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:18:00 - [62] There needs to be cloaks in the game and they are fine as they are! /thread Criminal Record
Toutaku Omega Strike Force	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:18:00 - [63] Edited by: Toutaku on 07/05/2009 23:19:02 I agree with my former corp mates grievances. Cloaks on non cov-ops ships should have a penalty against prolonged cloak use. Whether it be fuel, or the non cov-ops ship have a small chance of being probed, or the use of depth charges to disrupt the cloak of ships not designed to be stealthy. Leave the current cloak system for cov-ops ships and bombers alone since they were designed for cloaking and should be taking advantage of their specialized roles. For everything else, like BS, HAC's, etc., there should be a way to de-cloak them.
Herzog Wolfhammer	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:37:00 - [64] Originally by: Selia Evrion You mean the delay to locking time? Or the fact that those ships without a delay to locking time are now only good against Battleships... And when there's twenty of them? Like you said, nothing wrong with cloaks. Also, change the exploration probe visual effect back. The circles make me want to go out and murder someone. So this is why people get podded in WH space.
Forluhn Amarr 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2009.05.08 00:08:00 - [65] How about a new module that can be fitted into the highslots of ships that is kinda like an EMP except it does no dmg and removes cloaked ships in a area around the ship say like 10-50k depending on the ship size? All your base are belong to Amarr
Boknamar Gallente The Knights Trevor The Elders Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.08 00:15:00 - [66] Originally by: Forluhn How about a new module that can be fitted into the highslots of ships that is kinda like an EMP except it does no dmg and removes cloaked ships in a area around the ship say like 10-50k depending on the ship size? That has the potential to severely cripple covert ops and recon ships, which I really don't think need to be nerfed.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.08 00:20:00 - [67] Originally by: Forluhn How about a new module that can be fitted into the highslots of ships that is kinda like an EMP except it does no dmg and removes cloaked ships in a area around the ship say like 10-50k depending on the ship size? Every gate-camp would have at least one. No good. In 0.0 that would mean decloaker ship + bubble - no way through. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Herzog Wolfhammer	Posted - 2009.05.08 00:33:00 - [68] I really think that there is a whole world of opportunity here for more features. Let there be modules to break cloaks, specials detection probes, modules to boost cloaks, skills, counter skills - on and on. BTW, you can recall scan probes while cloaked and still not break cloak. Exploit? Also, it would not make sense to be talking to you buds and be undetectable while cloaked. So imagine that communications makes you detectable by modules that direction-find radio transmissions. Of course perhaps a cloaker can counter that with a "directional antenna" module. Ah let it be a battle of how many slots you have to sacrifice for cloaking or detecting cloaks, and how much skill time you want to spend on it. Then it becomes a battle of skills and wits. The cloak might make some things too easy, but to simply put in a "break cloak because you paid the ISK for it" module would "break" cloaking. Why make it easy for anybody? (That should be the slogan for EVE).
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.08 01:37:00 - [69] You can still go afk with mwd running. Dont need cloak. Ganking Buddhist Nun
Mara Rinn	Posted - 2009.05.08 04:12:00 - [70] Originally by: Infinity Ziona You can still go afk with mwd running. Dont need cloak. Are you flying something cap stable that is faster than an interceptor?
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.08 04:58:00 - [71] Someone sounds upset that they are not able to care bear in 0.0 without fear of being attacked. Cloaking mechanics is PERFECTLY fine.
ZinderX500 Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.08 06:12:00 - [72] Originally by: prefectro Someone sounds upset that they are not able to care bear in 0.0 without fear of being attacked. Cloaking mechanics is PERFECTLY fine. This.
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.08 06:19:00 - [73] Originally by: Mara Rinn Originally by: Infinity Ziona You can still go afk with mwd running. Dont need cloak. Are you flying something cap stable that is faster than an interceptor? Yup a cap stable interceptor. Ganking Buddhist Nun
Benzaiten Reverse Caldari Shokei	Posted - 2009.05.08 09:23:00 - [74] Originally by: Lacey Black Edited by: Lacey Black on 06/05/2009 21:45:26 Even in the real world a F-117 stealth fighter-bomber can be found, ask the USAF they lost one becasue it was detected. So there should be some balance as well in the Eve world with them as well. F117 dont use any cloak, its just proper engineering to dispers heating from plane and any incoming radar waves. Tamara (thats name of system able detect all planes, including stealth)is hardly mobile system and have relatively short detection range as its passive system detecting electromagnetic signatures (electronics on plane). There is also prototype of real invisibility cloak in existence and as far as i know it does not emit something you could detect from more then really short range. In space its even more complicated as its full of emissions from all stars around you. Add ships, stations, jumpgates, weapons fire emissions and you will have more luck detecting explosion of hand grenade in 10 AU distance then cloaked ship. Just in case you want bring more reality or common sense to eve.
Tippia Raddick Explorations	Posted - 2009.05.08 09:28:00 - [75] Edited by: Tippia on 08/05/2009 09:28:49 If you want to be realistic, then there is no stealth in space (well, not as long as you want to survive — and even dead, you'll be detectable). On the other hand, if you want to be realistic, there's very little in the way of combat in space either: if you're detected, you die — no way around it. That leaves the two options: stealth and die or be detected and die. It would make the game rather boring… ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Kale Kold Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.08 09:40:00 - [76] Originally by: prefectro Someone sounds upset that they are not able to care bear in 0.0 without fear of being attacked. Cloaking mechanics is PERFECTLY fine. This! Criminal Record
Kaivos Pyydys	Posted - 2009.05.08 10:44:00 - [77] Originally by: Lacey Black Edited by: Lacey Black on 06/05/2009 21:45:26 I see nothing wrong with the cloak system I agree.
Tippia Raddick Explorations	Posted - 2009.05.08 10:47:00 - [78] Originally by: Kaivos Originally by: Lacey Black I see nothing wrong with the cloak system I agree. That's only because it's cloaked — duh! ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Mawusi	Posted - 2009.05.08 11:47:00 - [79] Why not just have cloaking devices being to de-stabilise once activated, thereby setting a maximum amount of time that someone can cloak for before they then have to manually re-activate the module ? Something like 1hr for Covert Ops and less for the other cloaks. This would still allow people to go to a safe spot and cloak if 'real life calls', but wouldnt allow pilots to simply cloak in a system and go afk all day.
Raivi SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.09 03:46:00 - [80] Originally by: Lacey Black Edited by: Lacey Black on 06/05/2009 21:45:26 I see nothing wrong with the cloak system except I believe it is a bit oneside that needs some balance. Using the cloak on ships is legal, usefull to a degree but also can be a pain. I think CCP needs to develop a PROBE that can detect the emission generated by a cloaked ship. This gives defenders a chance to find the cloaked vessel. This would help with that silly individual that goes afk cloaked or a chance to find that bomber pilot that just blew your ore cans to dust. Or at least the cloak drain Cap or has to run a cycle that has to be restarted manualy. I think cloaking needs to be readdressed & balanced. Even in the real world a F-117 stealth fighter-bomber can be found, ask the USAF they lost one becasue it was detected. So there should be some balance as well in the Eve world with them as well. Ceiling hound is watching you rat. ---------------------------------------------
Discrodia Gallente Guild Navy Guild Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.09 03:48:00 - [81] Originally by: Faife Quote: I see nothing wrong with the cloak system... i agree. /thread QFT ______________________________________________ Discrodia > SILENCE! I KILL YOU! Northern Fall > They're just sleepers disc...
Selia Evrion Gallente Night-Stalkerz Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive	Posted - 2009.05.09 04:01:00 - [82] I'm really failing to see the issue here. So a cloaker is supposedly "shutting down a system". Let's look at this in basic terms. You see a red in system. Presumably, you alert fellows to the possibility that he may be active and killing people. Either your intel gets heeded or someone says "he's been there all day". Now, assuming you're ratting in a space that is relatively safe (I'm assuming most of us don't go into alliance border systems, in order to do our ratting ) you should be fine. Even if the cloaker is active, you will have friends around that can take him out. If the cloaker isn't active, you have nothing to worry about. So, all the people complaining that you "can't rat in system with a cloaker there" are obviously not following the "safe ratting" caveats: 1. Rat near friendly hubs. 2. Fly what you can afford to lose. 3. Look at your intel. 4. Get intel on the player - chances are they've been doing this for a while, so someone can report whether they're a cloaker or not. 5. Pay attention to your goddamn overview. 6. Pay attention to your goddamn overview. Really, there's no excuse for a ship coming out of cloak to have you locked down if you're paying attention. On the chance that you're ratting in something that takes longer to align than the time it takes them to decloak, wait for sensor calibration and lock you, then you should have long enough for friends to come to your rescue. Assuming of course, that you follow caveat 1. And if it's not a ship that can warp cloaked, then you shouldn't have ANY problems. If he comes in while you're ratting, you'll see him on your overview. If your only problem with cloaking is that you can't find that one guy in a cloaked raven, then your issue is not with him shutting down a system, it's with someone who has sacrificed something on his ship in order to increase his survivability. tl;dr Cloaks are fine, follow safe ratting rules and you'll be fine. Don't be scared just because one red is in system. desusigs
Louanne Barros	Posted - 2009.05.09 04:06:00 - [83] We of the Asteroid and Ice Belt Preservation, Protection and Safety League (AIBPPSL) send our regards.
Lacey Black Amarr Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.10 14:16:00 - [84] Edited by: Lacey Black on 10/05/2009 14:17:05 If Captain Kirk can find a cloaked Rommulean vessel, folks in Eve should be allowed the same chance to find a cloaked vessel as well with either a mod or the thing uses cap runs out of juice. Otherwise INHO it is a unblanced game mechanic.
FlyinS Caldari Planetary Industry and Trade Organization	Posted - 2009.05.11 18:57:00 - [85] Originally by: Selia Evrion tl;dr Cloaks are fine, follow safe ratting rules and you'll be fine. Don't be scared just because one red is in system. This is really it here. Basically the complaints in this thread boil down to, "I want lowsec to be as safe as highsec." I wonder how many of those complaining also insult carebears for wanting everything safe and easy...
Nomad Steel Caldari Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2009.05.13 22:47:00 - [86] No, just that even Cloaked pilots shold not be 100% safe. There should be a probe or mechanice that allows them to be found out.
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.05.13 22:58:00 - [87] Edited by: Irida Mershkov on 13/05/2009 22:58:14 Originally by: Lacey Black Edited by: Lacey Black on 10/05/2009 15:19:28 Edited by: Lacey Black on 10/05/2009 14:17:05 If Captain Kirk can find a cloaked Rommulean vessel, folks in Eve should be allowed the same chance to find a cloaked vessel as well with either a mod or the thing uses cap runs out of juice. Otherwise IMHO it is a unblanced game mechanic. Completely unbalanced, as they can't do a thing whilst cloaked! Edit: cloaking is fine.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.