| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cyrus Doul
Nictus Astartes
   |
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:40:00 -
[1]
Stealing this from another topic. cloaker fuel!
scale the amount per unit of time to fit the different level of cloakers and give ships that use cloaks to get their primary mission bonuses per level to fuel usages.
Pro's
Macros with cloaks to run and hide in 0.0 ratting will die cause they run out of gas eventually and become visible.
No 24/7 having wardeced corps hiding in a dead end constellation with someone in a cov ops or even just a frigate sitting within range of a gate giving 23/7 intel. would make wars more fun.
con's
possible market inflatation due to less macro miners in 0.0 or lowsec.
loss of subs of people who like to just buy their iskies and dont want to bother working for their iskies.
|
Cyrus Doul
Nictus Astartes
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:40:00 -
[2]
forgot to press the thumb button
|
Bibbleibble
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:46:00 -
[3]
Cloaks are fine. Deal with it.
________________________________________________
For changes to Minmatar Battleships click here (Now with added summary!) |
El Liptonez
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:57:00 -
[4]
A cloaked ship doesn't do anything. Deal with it.
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:58:00 -
[5]
I would support this idea if local channel was also removed
no more 23/7 intel
|
Cyrus Doul
Nictus Astartes
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 09:08:00 -
[6]
cloaked ships make it so people can not find them to remove the macros, and as to the local they cant check it round the clock if you can find them and kill them when they try instead of them being permainvisible.
|
Nur AlHuda
Callide Vulpis
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 09:40:00 -
[7]
support
|
ninjaholic
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 10:42:00 -
[8]
Cloaks are limited enough without making it worse. This has been raised MILLIONS of times, and the vast majority are against modifying cloaks and their mechanics.
No, cloaks are fine.
>>> SUPPORT EVE's OWN IN-GAME FIGHT RECORD TOOL! <<<
|
Arous Drephius
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 10:46:00 -
[9]
 Originally by: ninjaholic
No, cloaks are fine.
This.
Intel from local is the underlying problem here.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:07:00 -
[10]
not supported.
just because you wardecced them doesnt mean they cant be smart and avoid being killed.
|
|
|
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:11:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Arous Drephius
Originally by: ninjaholic
No, cloaks are fine.
This.
Intel from local is the underlying problem here.
This and this and no support.
~ Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic |
Piitaq
19th Star Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:22:00 -
[12]
AFK cloakers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone undocking their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from keyboard.
1 single cloaker can hide in a deep safe, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:29:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Originally by: Arous Drephius
Originally by: ninjaholic
No, cloaks are fine.
This.
Intel from local is the underlying problem here.
This and this and no support.
/ditto
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep.
I am always here.
Watching.
Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
it does get progressively longer.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:36:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Piitaq
AFK cloakers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone undocking their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from keyboard.
1 single cloaker can hide in a deep safe, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
Tissue?
|
Intangible Mirage
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:53:00 -
[15]
So because you can not deal with a person who poses no immediate or direct threat to you, you want to nerf it?
Cloaks are fine as is. |
Piitaq
Gallente
19th Star Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 12:07:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Intangible Mirage
So because you can not deal with a person who poses no immediate or direct threat to you, you want to nerf it?
Cloaks are fine as is.
To a miner sitting in a Hulk, a SB is a potential threat.
Then people say, you just need combat support in belt. Only problem is the people saying this, is the same people who wont do combat support for their alliance mates, sitting hours in belts watching out for an AFK cloacker that might do a bomb run.
Also with combat support, there still is a good chance to kill a hulk with a SB and then the isk damage Vs. cost of SB is met.
|
W3370Pi4
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 13:25:00 -
[17]
_______
Join the "Legit Trading"Channel
*Scam Free Trading Channel* |
Hester Shaw
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 15:46:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Piitaq
Originally by: Intangible Mirage
So because you can not deal with a person who poses no immediate or direct threat to you, you want to nerf it?
Cloaks are fine as is.
To a miner sitting in a Hulk, a SB is a potential threat.
Then people say, you just need combat support in belt. Only problem is the people saying this, is the same people who wont do combat support for their alliance mates, sitting hours in belts watching out for an AFK cloacker that might do a bomb run.
Also with combat support, there still is a good chance to kill a hulk with a SB and then the isk damage Vs. cost of SB is met.
What's your point?
|
Karentaki
Gallente
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 15:48:00 -
[19]
Originally by: El Liptonez
A cloaked ship doesn't do anything. Deal with it.
QFT.
Quote:
EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
|
iP0D
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 15:52:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Karentaki
Originally by: El Liptonez
A cloaked ship doesn't do anything. Deal with it.
QFT.
That is only partially correct. Cloaking ships provide great benefits when involved in a bit of teamwork.
I'd hate having to take fuel along tbh, especially in w-space, but since CCP stated they can now add fuel bays to any ship class who knows what they come up with 
|
|
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 16:50:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Piitaq
AFK dockers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone logging in their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from keyboard.
1 single docker can hide in a NPC station, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 16:53:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Piitaq
AFK unsubscribers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone undocked in their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from the game.
1 single unsubscriber can hide with his ship logged out in a safe, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 16:56:00 -
[23]
Great...yet an another cloaking whine thread.
Not supported for the billionth friggen time.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Karentaki
Gallente
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 17:02:00 -
[24]
Originally by: iP0D
That is only partially correct. Cloaking ships provide great benefits when involved in a bit of teamwork.
I'd hate having to take fuel along tbh, especially in w-space, but since CCP stated they can now add fuel bays to any ship class who knows what they come up with
Correct me if I'm wrong, but an AFK cloaker can't possibly collect intel, mainly because they're afk.
Quote:
EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
|
Larkonis Trassler
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 17:11:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Piitaq
AFK cloakers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone undocking their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from keyboard.
1 single cloaker can hide in a deep safe, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
He also can't kill you...
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
No. Larkonis |
iP0D
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 17:17:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Karentaki
Originally by: iP0D
That is only partially correct. Cloaking ships provide great benefits when involved in a bit of teamwork.
I'd hate having to take fuel along tbh, especially in w-space, but since CCP stated they can now add fuel bays to any ship class who knows what they come up with
Correct me if I'm wrong, but an AFK cloaker can't possibly collect intel, mainly because they're afk.
"AFK Cloaker" is the commonly described syndrome, not the mechanism  . The beef most people have with the whole thing is that there is first of all no way to distinguish an afk cloaker from an active cloaker (which makes sense, doh), secondly that there is no way they can do anything about them (scanning, probing) and thirdly that there is no risk element involved in cloaking activities when used to hamper operations in someone's territories.
Only when cloaking activity is used as a prelude to engagements (ganks ftw, also: beef black ops more ktnx), but that's not this "afk / cloaker" syndrome really. It may **** people off such tactics, but this is something which does involve taking risk to achieve reward .. it involves stuff going boom.
When I'm screwing around in someone's backyard, the poor sods have no way to do anything against my activity or lack of activity. I like this, they hate it. Most of the time I really am afk, but plenty of times I'm not and I track names & ships, peak times and lowtimes, work through screenshots of towers, andsoforth.
Sucks for them, tbh. But I have to admit that there is zero risk or effort involved for me. Which does kinda go against the spirit of EVE. Again, I'd hate to have to use fuel to cloak, but I could understand such a change. It would require me to do my afk harassing as well as scouting or target mapping with teamwork involved, instead of a solo zero risk activity on the side
In w-space I have to say that cloaks using fuel would really make stuff prone to running into issues. Unless you have a pos and actually live in a hole, but for some playstyles where you move around from pocket to pocket and surface only rarely it would require some adaptations. The lazy part in me would hate it.
As I said, I'm not supporting it But I can understand it if changes were made to subtly guide people away from the syndrome to more consistent use.
|
iP0D
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 17:19:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Originally by: Piitaq
AFK cloakers have close to zero risk of loosing their ship. Everyone undocking their ship should potentially put their ship at risk. Especially when away from keyboard.
1 single cloaker can hide in a deep safe, and no matter how many people and ships you throw at it, you can do NOTHING to find him and kill him.
If this proposal can put a stop to this. Ill support it.!
He also can't kill you...
He's not the one with that job That's for others most of the time, remember the job of the "afk cloaker" is to make people paranoid, fearful of ganks, suspicious of moving ships, etcetera.
Wonderful job tbh, especially when they start to whine in local, but it IS zero risk.
|
Sir Muffoon
Debitum Naturae
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 18:33:00 -
[28]
Supporting, it's too easy to just cloak in a system and be able to give intel with no risk at all. |
Larkonis Trassler
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 18:44:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Sir Muffoon
Supporting, it's too easy to just cloak in a system and be able to give intel with no risk at all.
If he's giving intel then he's not AFK.
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
No. Larkonis |
Larkonis Trassler
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 18:49:00 -
[30]
Reading these threads... I've a good mind to stick alts in ECCM'd up inties in safespots in major 0.0 systems and troll your probers with unprobable ships... because if you nerf cloaking that's what people will move to.
0.0 carebears... biggest carebears.
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
No. Larkonis |
|
|
Sir Muffoon
Debitum Naturae
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 18:55:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Sir Muffoon on 10/08/2009 18:57:38
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
If he's giving intel then he's not AFK.
That's the point, you don't know and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.
At least this proposal includes risks, you can stay in a system all day but you'll need to coordinate logistics for the fuel, which means there's more points in which for a group to stop you being a afk cloaker.
At the moment it's just completely riskless for a lot of gain.
edit;
Quote:
Reading these threads... I've a good mind to stick alts in ECCM'd up inties in safespots in major 0.0 systems and troll your probers with unprobable ships... because if you nerf cloaking that's what people will move to.
0.0 carebears... biggest carebears.
You can do that if you want, but you'll never become unprobable in a ceptor, and you won't stop anyone ratting.
But yeah, those cloakers definitely aren't the carebears in this scenario, because they're definitely risking alot while cloaked. Really.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 19:03:00 -
[32]
Not supported.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Oarta
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 19:17:00 -
[33]
Supported, there should be a cost/risk involved for extended use of regular cloaking devices, however, Covert Ops Cloaks should not have use fuel.
To use Covert Ops cloaks you need a much larger array of skills and even then, only specific ships can fit them. This is enough of a drawback to warrant free use.
|
Dunkin McLoud
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 19:36:00 -
[34]
Remove local u dont know if he is in the system so u can relax by not knowing if a cloaker is or is not in system since u seem to be scared by the fact that you know that he is in system.
|
Lord Aftermath
The Aftermath.
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 20:08:00 -
[35]
The Aftermath. does NOT support this idea.
|
Aniel Zaar
Gallente
Light of Orion
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 22:33:00 -
[36]
Not supported. A cloaked ship poses no direct threat. Get some medicine to battle stress if it's making you nervous.
*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^
By the way, I am an Ishtar and T2 sentries fan. Fight to make the sentry damage rig work for all drones. |
Stil Harkonnen
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 22:38:00 -
[37]
I'm assuming that all the people who want cloaks to have fuel are 0.0 carebears who dock up as soon as an afk cloaker comes into your system.
First, you're in 0.0. it's not safe, don't pretend it is and don't try to make it safe. Just because you can't take your hulk out and afk mine all day cause there's a neutral in your system doesn't mean something is broken. it means you're not trying hard enough to keep them out.
not supported
|
Lee Dalton
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 22:50:00 -
[38]
Not sure if I agree with this, but the claim that cloakers do nothing is just wrong.
Aside from the intel they provide, if nothing else they are an excellent souce of warp ins.
***
You're only as good as your last fight. |
Cyrus Doul
Nictus Astartes
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 02:02:00 -
[39]
For those of you using the afk cloak idea. Thats not relevant to what i meant this thread to be about. cause you are right. an afk one does nothing. but you get one person who has 3 paid accounts or whatever, all he has to do is **** around with his other two while his third one sits there watching stuff for his corp to always know what you and your friends are in when you are trying to get to him.
This would fix 0.0 macro ratters since as far as i can tell a macro raven cant fit a cov ops cloak. this should make you 0.0 guys happy that people aren't stealing your iskies
A cloaked frigate makes a sweet warpin point like someone else mentioned.
Would it have been better to say not to nerf cov ops cloaks. but then we would have all these people complaining about how why bother. people will just train for it and scout in a BR. i guess thats the case, but it still requires them to but the better part of what? 80 million on the line instead of a million isk cloak with a million isk frigate or crusier
|
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 03:16:00 -
[40]
Nerf stations! It should cost fuel every hour to stay docked. I mean - a docked ship is totally safe, and that's not right!
Someone could have 3 accounts and one of them just sits there in a station watching local and giving 100% safe intell 23x7!
~ Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic |
|
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 03:30:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Nerf stations! It should cost fuel every hour to stay docked. I mean - a docked ship is totally safe, and that's not right!
Someone could have 3 accounts and one of them just sits there in a station watching local and giving 100% safe intell 23x7!
Dude... you rock... no seriously... your the best.
TLDR: I lol'd
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
AtheistOfDoom
Amarr
The Athiest Syndicate
Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 05:56:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Bibbleibble
Cloaks are fine. Deal with it.
this. (local is fine too)
Pew Pew Lazorz!!! |
Hanster Maluki
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 07:36:00 -
[43]
Not supported
|
Syaran
Gallente
IMPERIAL SENATE
Cool Kids Club
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 07:46:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Nerf stations! It should cost fuel every hour to stay docked. I mean - a docked ship is totally safe, and that's not right!
Someone could have 3 accounts and one of them just sits there in a station watching local and giving 100% safe intell 23x7!
Dude... you rock... no seriously... your the best.
TLDR: I lol'd
So true. Not supported.
|
Sir Muffoon
Debitum Naturae
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 13:04:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Sir Muffoon on 11/08/2009 13:03:54
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Nerf stations! It should cost fuel every hour to stay docked. I mean - a docked ship is totally safe, and that's not right!
Someone could have 3 accounts and one of them just sits there in a station watching local and giving 100% safe intell 23x7!
You can camp stations. You cant report intel on what ships people are in and where they are when you're in a station. You cant uncloak, tackle someone and then have a gang jump in while you're in station. |
Larkonis Trassler
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 13:25:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Sir Muffoon
That's the point, you don't know and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.
At least this proposal includes risks, you can stay in a system all day but you'll need to coordinate logistics for the fuel, which means there's more points in which for a group to stop you being a afk cloaker.
At the moment it's just completely riskless for a lot of gain.
Yes... their is something you can do about it. You can stage out of a system that isn't being scouted. You can use a bit misdirection, trickery etc into making the enemy think you have a smaller force than you actually have, etc etc.
Originally by: Sir Muffoon
Quote:
Reading these threads... I've a good mind to stick alts in ECCM'd up inties in safespots in major 0.0 systems and troll your probers with unprobable ships... because if you nerf cloaking that's what people will move to.
0.0 carebears... biggest carebears.
You can do that if you want, but you'll never become unprobable in a ceptor, and you won't stop anyone ratting.
But yeah, those cloakers definitely aren't the carebears in this scenario, because they're definitely risking alot while cloaked. Really.
[Stiletto, Probe this homedawg]
Overdrive Injector System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
Warp Disruptor II
Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I
Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
Standard Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Sabretooth Light Missile
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
Gl probing this down without all skills at level 5, faction launcher, faction probes and a pirate implant set. Protip: even then you probably won't.
It can nip around, wait for a ratter or miner to begin going about his business, get a gang to wait a couple of systems over, swoop in, get point etc etc.
If a cloaker in a system is in a ship that you deem to be a threat to your residents then... I dunno... bait him? Defend your space? If all he's doing is relaying int then you can do the same dawg, it's a less unsavoury tactic than 'metagaming' via in corp spies and listening in on vent/TS.
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
No. Larkonis |
Neti Keire
Amarr
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Tread Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 13:57:00 -
[47]
Not supported
|
Mr LaboratoryRat
Confederation of DuckTape Lovers
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 14:54:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Cyrus Doul
Macros with cloaks to run and hide in 0.0 ratting will die cause they run out of gas eventually and become visible.
quote]
this is not going to work, cause the macro will get adjusted too this within a day or 2
|
Piitaq
Gallente
19th Star Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 09:09:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Stil Harkonnen
I'm assuming that all the people who want cloaks to have fuel are 0.0 carebears who dock up as soon as an afk cloaker comes into your system.
First, you're in 0.0. it's not safe, don't pretend it is and don't try to make it safe. Just because you can't take your hulk out and afk mine all day cause there's a neutral in your system doesn't mean something is broken. it means you're not trying hard enough to keep them out.
not supported
You are right. It is the miners, that have the problem with this.
You are also right, that most hulk pilots safe up, as a mining barge isnt that great a combat ship.
You are also right about 0.0 isnt safe and never should be. What we want however, is the ability to remove a threat to us, by docking up changing to a combat ship, move out and engage the enemy. Im not saying it should be easy to kill cov ops cloak, or other cloackers, just want a very tiny small chance, of actually dealing with the "problem".
|
Czar Vilinous
A Fortiori
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 15:27:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Nerf stations! It should cost fuel every hour to stay docked. I mean - a docked ship is totally safe, and that's not right!
Someone could have 3 accounts and one of them just sits there in a station watching local and giving 100% safe intell 23x7!
Dead on. This is not a good idea.
Not supported.
|
|
|
shuckstar
Gallente
Hauling hogs
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 15:43:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Arous Drephius
Originally by: ninjaholic
No, cloaks are fine.
This.
Intel from local is the underlying problem here.
Signed and not supported.
|
Ekeim
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 12:18:00 -
[52]
When spending a large portion of time in the map screen due to the new scanning system, IMO the ability to cloak is very important for finding exploration content in low/nullsec.
While it is true that you likely won't be finding me when cloaked in a deep safespot, it's also true that I'm not planning on running these sites in my Helios.
|
Somal Thunder
Intergalactic Peace Organization
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 21:14:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Cyrus Doul
Macros with cloaks to run and hide in 0.0 ratting will die cause they run out of gas eventually and become visible.
Substitute: Safespot, cloak, log off.
Originally by: Cyrus Doul
No 24/7 having wardeced corps hiding in a dead end constellation with someone in a cov ops or even just a frigate sitting within range of a gate giving 23/7 intel. would make wars more fun.
Substitute: Neutral alt scout.
|
Hun Jakuza
24th Imperial Guard
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 13:44:00 -
[54]
/supported
But the 0.0 coward carebears always dont wanna changes this cloaking crap.
They wanna more
benefits for cloakers like localchat nerf.
Nobody would be discover them on local. Long times ago the CCP removed them in games when thet dont move their ship under 30 minutes, but the 0.0 noobs were crying too much and the developers removed this opportunity from the game. 30 mins or 1 hour or 2 hour nvm.
|
Tiger's Spirit
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 13:54:00 -
[55]
/supported
But everone know.
This cloaking rules will not change, because the most of CSM members just insignificant 0.0 chessmen, who got their positions,the 0.0 alliances made it compulsory for their members to vote for them.
So ... CSM , only the 0.0 the embodiment of interests.
|
DeviloftheHell
RaaFharaX
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 15:14:00 -
[56]
|
Baaldor
Igneus Auctorita
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 18:07:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Piitaq
Then people say, you just need combat support in belt. Only problem is the people saying this, is the same people who wont do combat support for their alliance mates, sitting hours in belts watching out for an AFK cloacker that might do a bomb run.
So you want some one to improve your situation for you because you are to lazy to improve it your self?
You picked the alliance mates, find another group of idiots.
|
marie blueprint
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 02:57:00 -
[58]
gank bears whine not supported
|
Anah Karah
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:24:00 -
[59]
[Stiletto, Probe this homedawg]
Overdrive Injector System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
Warp Disruptor II
Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I
Conjunctive Ladar ECCM Scanning Array I
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
Standard Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Sabretooth Light Missile
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
Gl probing this down without all skills at level 5, faction launcher, faction probes and a pirate implant set. Protip: even then you probably won't.
It can nip around, wait for a ratter or miner to begin going about his business, get a gang to wait a couple of systems over, swoop in, get point etc etc.
If a cloaker in a system is in a ship that you deem to be a threat to your residents then... I dunno... bait him? Defend your space? If all he's doing is relaying int then you can do the same dawg, it's a less unsavoury tactic than 'metagaming' via in corp spies and listening in on vent/TS.
PS it's a sad day when a system with 30+ people from a supposedly hardcore 0.0 alliance is brought to a standstill by an AFK cloaked covert ops in local. As I said, 0.0 carebears, best carebears.
Ummm you do know that the stilleto is the only inty with 4 mids that could actually pull this off.
Great to see we have CSM members intersted in 'balance' and not just trolling.....did i mention that i might have been just slightly sarcastic when i just said that? no? oh well...next time i'll make myself more clear
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:31:00 -
[60]
Danger? In 0.0? THIS IS INTOLERABLE.
|
|
|
Dasfry
Demio's Corporation
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 18:06:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Dasfry on 23/09/2009 18:07:29
I support the idea of fuel, for cloaking.
You could make it something small.
I does not have to take up a lot of space m3.
It also adds a bit of tactics and fore thought requirement.
Do I have enough cloak-fuel to scout all the systems on my list?
Where would be my nearest refueling stop, in order to continue my objective?
***********
Military Tactics
Dasfry, CEO
Demio's Corporation
|
Baaldor
Igneus Auctorita
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 18:18:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Dasfry
Edited by: Dasfry on 23/09/2009 18:07:29
It also adds a bit of tactics and fore thought requirement.
Oh like undock, warp to belt, go afk, shoot rat, mine rock?
|
Saerynn
Lone Star Joint Venture
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 20:36:00 -
[63]
Not supported. |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 20:40:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Dasfry
Edited by: Dasfry on 23/09/2009 18:07:29
I support the idea of fuel, for cloaking.
You could make it something small.
I does not have to take up a lot of space m3.
It also adds a bit of tactics and fore thought requirement.
Do I have enough cloak-fuel to scout all the systems on my list?
Where would be my nearest refueling stop, in order to continue my objective?
CVA pet detected!
|
Hun Jakuza
24th Imperial Guard
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:25:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 24/09/2009 06:26:38
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Originally by: Sir Muffoon
Supporting, it's too easy to just cloak in a system and be able to give intel with no risk at all.
If he's giving intel then he's not AFK.
But they are in local, when he not playing. So, he is in safe because noone can catch him. Easy for cloaking when, no one can catch him. They just reserve the server capacity, when they not playing.
Yes, not need to make against afk cloakers, if the cloaked ship catchable. But now, everyone use the cloak on ceptor to capital.
This is the second problem. Would be logical, if just the cloak ships (recon,covops,sb,black ops) can just use it them.
I knows the 0.0 players always cry for some eploits and easy lurking, but this is b*llsh*t. We need back the old times when those players who was AFK minimum 30 minutes the server kicked them. Play or go out, don't waste the costly server times.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:47:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 24/09/2009 06:53:02
Originally by: darius mclever
[CVA pet detected!
Wrong forum, dear. I think you wanted COAD one tick up.
There is no need to introduce fuel for cloaks when we already have the capacitor to build on.
Make cloaks draw a constant amount while operating with CovOps drawing considerably less to allow for extended cloaked operations.
Combine it with capacitors not recharging while cloaked (including gate cloak) and people have to decloak once in a while to recharge.
No more cloaked Ravens, Capitals, AFK'ers .. with new probes the small window is more than adequate for a hit provided you have a general location of victim/client/hostile.
Removing local wouldn't make sense as CCP has used the gates internal communications as a reason for local in their WH fiction .. where gates exists, local exists.
Would be nice if null-sec was delayed though. A three to four minute delay applicable to all parties with a sovereignty holder able to online a module to cut it in half for "his side" .. not safe, but safer.
|
Aniel Zaar
Gallente
BIG
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:21:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Make cloaks draw a constant amount while operating with CovOps drawing considerably less to allow for extended cloaked operations.
Combine it with capacitors not recharging while cloaked (including gate cloak) and people have to decloak once in a while to recharge.
To be honest, I like the complete immunity I get with on a CovertOps frigate in hostile space. I haven't seen a single good argument so far as to why that should change.
*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^*-*^-^ |
Br41n
Amarr
Pinky and the Brain corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 08:19:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Ephemeron
I would support this idea if local channel was also removed
no more 23/7 intel
This and also remove local in highsec.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pinky: Gee, Brain. What are we going to do tonight?
Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Uzuki Shootmenow
Relentless Influence
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:32:00 -
[69]
not supported. deal with cloakers. grow some balls.
|
Tiger's Spirit
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 12:02:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 24/09/2009 12:03:38
Originally by: Uzuki Shootmenow
not supported. deal with cloakers. grow some balls.
Cloakers have balls ?
Everyone knows, the story is not the AFK cloak and everyone know the 0.0 players why dont wanna changes.
Who using them ? Pilots who using cloak for belt ratting, for anomaly, for plexing in 0.0. Cloak on Ishtar,Cloak on ceptor,cloak on everything lol in 0.0.
Oh yes. They using cloak and they cry a river against CCP and players who want to change the cloak MWD tricks, AFK cloak, cloak on not cloak user ship rules. Better if you don't speak from balls and don't speak the other 0.0 coward lurker.
This cloak rules need to change. Want to use cloak ? Do it! If you sit in covops or recon, but forget it, if you fly with a HAC.
|
|
|
Suitonia
Gallente
HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 16:50:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Anah Karah
Ummm you do know that the stilleto is the only inty with 4 mids that could actually pull this off.
Great to see we have CSM members intersted in 'balance' and not just trolling.....did i mention that i might have been just slightly sarcastic when i just said that? no? oh well...next time i'll make myself more clear
There are lowslot ECCM modules too.
[Ares, Sup]
Warded Magnetometric Backup Cluster I
Warded Magnetometric Backup Cluster I
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
Warp Disruptor II
Conjunctive Magnetometric ECCM Scanning Array I
Light Ion Blaster II, Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Antimatter Charge S
Rocket Launcher II, Gremlin Rocket
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Same results on an Ares.
[Malediction, Sup]
RADAR Backup Array II
RADAR Backup Array II
Overdrive Injector System II
Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
Warp Disruptor II
Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I
Rocket Launcher II, Gremlin Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Gremlin Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Gremlin Rocket
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, EMP S
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Same results on a Malediction.
---
Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |