EVE Search - Scale all Cloaking devices' decloaking distance with ship signature

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Scale all Cloaking devices' decloaking distance with ship signature

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 39	Posted - 2012.06.22 12:30:00 - [1] - Quote This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. The formula would have the current decloaking distance for the average cruiser remain about the same. Decloaking distance = 2000 / 135 * ship signature Ship - Sig - Decloak distance Frig - 40 m - 593 m Cruiser - 135 m - 2 km MWD cruiser - 675 m - 10 km BS - 420 m - 6.2 km Carrier - 2950 m - 43.7 km
Dain Highwind State Protectorate Caldari State 6	Posted - 2012.06.22 13:45:00 - [2] - Quote Uncatchable covops arround 0.0?? im not saying is a bad idea just i dont like it. We need features to kill moar ships not to save them....
Danel Tosh EVE Protection Agency Intrepid Crossing 27	Posted - 2012.06.22 14:40:00 - [3] - Quote Actually I like this Idea, It could help get rid of all those pesky cloaked motherships sitting around (im actually not being sarcastic). Black ops BS should get a bonus in cloak radius reduction so it is kept as leet as it is.
Callic Veratar Power of the Phoenix 242	Posted - 2012.06.22 16:52:00 - [4] - Quote I don't know if I like a linear scale, but I like the direction of this idea. ... reflecting about what scale would be best, logarithmic and exponential both have merits at the extreme ends of the scale, so maybe linear is best to keep the middle even?
Nikk Narrel Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels 347	Posted - 2012.06.22 17:35:00 - [5] - Quote For non covops ships, I can see this being interesting and fun. CovOps boats have spun away from what devs intended, and i suspect they will be rebalanced at some point. Between local chat, cyno hotdrops, and other details... yeah, they are due for love.
Gizznitt Malikite Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 369	Posted - 2012.06.22 17:48:00 - [6] - Quote Nice way to nerf the MWD Cloak Warp trick!!! Once a BS or BC hits their MWD, their sig will bloom to that of a carrier, and they'll be decloaked by the gate!!! Overall, the idea has potential!! However, I think the numbers need some re-working.... Typically ships pulse their MWD when they cloak to get as far away from their "spawn" point as possible to reduce the likelyhood of an enemy decloaking them. With you're suggestion, pulsing a MWD on a recon, a blockade runner, or even a covops is suicide!!!
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks 1812	Posted - 2012.06.22 18:08:00 - [7] - Quote Make the covops cloak immune to this effect. Covert ops ships are balanced around their ability to cloak and should be handled separately. Nerfing their cloak would nerf the ship itself. The numbers need some tweaking, but I kind of like this idea overall. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you.
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 41	Posted - 2012.06.22 22:28:00 - [8] - Quote FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Make the covops cloak immune to this effect. Covert ops ships are balanced around their ability to cloak and should be handled separately. Nerfing their cloak would nerf the ship itself. The numbers need some tweaking, but I kind of like this idea overall. Thank you for all the support on this idea. To be honest, this is not intended as a nerf to anything with a signature radius equal to or less than 135m. The Falcon starts at 180m, so maybe we tweak the equation a little by changing the 135m to 200m. I do like the idea of the Covert Ops Cloaking device providing a 25% reduction to the signature radius, so that the module inherently makes the ship harder to see by simply being fitted. .. Or The bonus could be applied by the ship skill: Recon, BO, Cov Ops 5% reduction to signature radius per level. The idea is that the smaller a ship is, the easier it is to hide. And that certain Covert-type ships are naturally easier to hide by their ship design. We still are waiting to see BO be able to fit a Cov Ops cloak. Seems long overdue. PS: Cloak+AB trick would still work without blowing up the signature radius, but the ship would not travel as fast (as MWD) while cloaked.
Idris Mandela Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 39	Posted - 2012.06.23 04:44:00 - [9] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. The formula would have the current decloaking distance for the average cruiser remain about the same. Decloaking distance = 2000 / 200 * ship signature Ship - Sig - Decloak distance Frig - 40 m - 400 m Cruiser - 150 m - 1.5 km Frig MWD - 200 m - 2 km BS - 420 m - 4.2 km Cruiser MWD - 675 m - 6.8 km Bustard MWD - 1032 m - 10.3 km BS MWD - 1375 m - 13.8 km Carrier - 2950 m - 43.7 km Mothership - 177.8 km Titan - 237 km With some tweaking here and there this has the potential to be an excellent idea.
sabre906 Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice 341	Posted - 2012.06.23 05:00:00 - [10] - Quote Seems like either an indirect way to nerf mwd cloak trick, or aimed at the lol cloaked titans. Why not just make cloak unfittable in caps? Or disrupted by mwd? Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue 682	Posted - 2012.06.23 05:22:00 - [11] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. The formula would have the current decloaking distance for the average cruiser remain about the same. Decloaking distance = 2000 / 200 * ship signature Ship - Sig - Decloak distance Frig - 40 m - 400 m Cruiser - 150 m - 1.5 km Frig MWD - 200 m - 2 km BS - 420 m - 4.2 km Cruiser MWD - 675 m - 6.8 km Bustard MWD - 1032 m - 10.3 km BS MWD - 1375 m - 13.8 km Carrier - 2950 m - 43.7 km Mothership - 177.8 km Titan - 237 km LIke others have said, it needs some tweaking, but excellent start. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED.
Busta Rock The DawnSoarers 1	Posted - 2012.06.23 05:47:00 - [12] - Quote I like this idea, with some tweaking. in particular, covops/force recon/BOPS and blockade runners should be immune to this effect, or get a substantial reduction in their sigrad based on skill level due to their inherently stealthy nature, thus greatly reducing the decloak radius bloom effect under MWD. also, for all ships, the decloak radius should be adjusted after all other modifiers to sigrad have taken effect (implants for example). this would lead to a wide variability in decloak radii dependent on ship fitting, and thus some very interesting unpredictability.
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 44	Posted - 2012.06.24 03:07:00 - [13] - Quote Targeting delay should follow the scan resolution strength because ships with faster targeting systems naturally re-calibrate faster. Smaller ships should have a smaller sensor re-calibration than larger ones because their scan resolution is so much higher. The formula yield about the same sensor re-calibration/targeting delay for force recons as the current mechanics with Cloaking at level 5: Sensor Recalibration = 5 * 250 \ Scan Resolution for Cov Ops Cloaking Device Sensor Recalibration = 10 * 250 \ Scan Resolution for Improved Cloaking Device Sensor Recalibration = 20 * 250 \ Scan Resolution for Prototype Cloaking Device Some cloaking devices add a scan res penalty (a topic for a separate discussion) which increases some of the times below: Manticore/Widow = 0 s (Ship bonus) Cheetah = 2.22 s Falcon = 4.55 s Dominix = 37 s (Imp) Chimera = 74 s (Imp) To me, it makes more sensor to extend the 0 s targeting delay ship bonus to force recons and to cov ops as well. The scan res penalty should also be scraped from all cloaking devices because that is already accounted for in the targeting delay.
Gerrick Palivorn Caldari Provisions Caldari State 280	Posted - 2012.06.24 05:45:00 - [14] - Quote Very sound idea maybe have the curve logrithmic instead of linear, with a cap of around 30 km.
leviticus ander CATO.nss 181	Posted - 2012.06.24 08:01:00 - [15] - Quote Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Very sound idea maybe have the curve logrithmic instead of linear, with a cap of around 30 km. I agree that it shouldn't be that big on caps/Scaps but a titan having a decloak range of 100-150km would be reasonable.
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 48	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:38:00 - [16] - Quote leviticus ander wrote: Gerrick Palivorn wrote: Very sound idea maybe have the curve logrithmic instead of linear, with a cap of around 30 km. I agree that it shouldn't be that big on caps/Scaps but a titan having a decloak range of 100-150km would be reasonable. Andy Landen wrote: CAP - Carrier - 2950 m - 43.7 km SCP - Mothership - 177.8 km SCP - Titan - 237 km You make a good point. If you think about the scanner's ability to see being based on the angular resolution (maybe connected with the scan resolution?) then the equation would not be logarithmic but quadratic, because a scan must probe space along the surface of a sphere centered on the scanner, whose surface area is 4pir^2. The equation then becomes: decloaking distance = sqrt( sig radius / (4pi5.3052E-6)) If it was connected with scan resolution, then ships with high scan resolutions would be able to decloak ships from farther away and no one would be able to predict how far a ship could be before something was decloaked and insane scan resolutions would decloak anything on the grid. I am not sure that we want to go there, but strong bonuses to covert ships sig radius (-75% per level?) could help with that. Even when you can see them, you have a hard time targeting them. TP bubbles on HICs as a means for decloaking ships or targeting covert ships better? All those ideas could make things VERY interesting. With the new formula, we get the following numbers: F Frig 775m C Cruiser 1500m C Bustard 1597m F FrigWD 1732m BS Dominix 2510m C CruiserWD 3182m C BustardWD 3934m BS DominixWD 4541m CAP Carrier 6652m SCP Mothership 16331m SCP Titan 18855m
Idris Mandela Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 39	Posted - 2012.06.25 01:53:00 - [17] - Quote /bump for a good idea
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks 1824	Posted - 2012.06.25 14:03:00 - [18] - Quote Dropping sig radius for covops would have the unintended effect of buffing them in combat. Time to target would increase and your weapons would be less effective against them. As a covert ops addict I would enjoy the buff, however I don't think it would be balanced. I'm going to stick with the idea of the Covert Ops Cloaking Device II simply not having this effect. edit: OR have the covops cloak sig radius reduction be an active ability, activated only while while the cloak is running. I think the first option is probably easier on CCP. edit: also, there should be a cap on how small the decloak radius can get. It shouldn't be possible for someone to build something that is virtually impervious to decloaks, because that would be stupidly OP. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you.
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 52	Posted - 2012.06.27 02:46:00 - [19] - Quote FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Dropping sig radius for covops would have the unintended effect of buffing them in combat. Time to target would increase and your weapons would be less effective against them. As a covert ops addict I would enjoy the buff, however I don't think it would be balanced. I'm going to stick with the idea of the Covert Ops Cloaking Device II simply not having this effect. edit: OR have the covops cloak sig radius reduction be an active ability, activated only while while the cloak is running. I think the first option is probably easier on CCP. edit: also, there should be a limit on how small the decloak radius can get. It shouldn't be possible for someone to build something that is virtually impervious to decloaks, because that would be stupidly OP. Halo implants and a boosting Loki would let me get an Anathema down to just 24.2m. I understand your points about preferring the Covert Ops Device have a sig radius reduction while active, but I do have to admit that a smaller signature for all covert ships while decloaked makes a lot of sense too. Stealth bombers have a radar signature the size of a small bird, so weapon systems have a very hard time locking on them. Stealth ships would be totally in their role to operate similarly. I would not limit the decloak radius for several reasons. First, you can't get the sig radius to zero, so a ship can always be decloaked. Second, facing off with a ship with a sig radius of 24.2 m plus T3 command support in system brings much larger challenges than the incidental decloak radius. Third, a sig radius of 24.2 m is in the ballpark of typical frigate signatures. Fourth, 24.2 m still gives a decloak radius of 240 m. Fifth, trying to decloak a ship with a decloak radius of 240 m and friends in system is probably not much different than decloaking a ship with a decloak radius of 500 m. Sixth, frigates are supposed to be small, agile, easy to hide scouts and tacklers. I'll stop myself now in case I go on even further.
Qolde Bombs Away. Nulli Tertius 58	Posted - 2012.06.27 03:02:00 - [20] - Quote I feel the current inability to warp while cloaked with most ships, and the size of the ships themselves already provides enough opportunity to decloak ships. Ive decloaked a covops before in lowsec at a gate camp. It still warped, but point remains. Why is everyone so in favor of this? If someone craps in your sandbox: 1. Light it on fire 2. Grab your shovel 3. Throw it back at them.
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 53	Posted - 2012.06.27 03:13:00 - [21] - Quote Qolde wrote: I feel the current inability to warp while cloaked with most ships, and the size of the ships themselves already provides enough opportunity to decloak ships. Ive decloaked a covops before in lowsec at a gate camp. It still warped, but point remains. Why is everyone so in favor of this? The point of this thread is NOT to make it easier or harder to decloak a ship. The point is: Andy Landen wrote: This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. That said, since you were gate camping, realize that not every ship that passes through has to fight you and that it is okay for a ship to escape your camp. After all, how much higher level thought occurs during a gate camp anyway? So you can't expect to effectively counter ships with tactical and strategic purposes like covert ops. Besides, this thread is about cloaky mechanics as it relates to ship size, and not about making your gate camp easier.
Jackal Datapaw Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 23	Posted - 2012.06.27 06:41:00 - [22] - Quote I look forward to worshiping my new anti-cloak jumpgate overlord, +1
Qolde Bombs Away. Nulli Tertius 58	Posted - 2012.06.27 06:43:00 - [23] - Quote Yes, not everything has to fight you. That's the point of the cloak. If somoene cloaks a non cloaky ship in front of you, you're going to catch them. If they aren't in front of you, you're not going to catch them. What situation does this change anything? Camping a titan in front of a station? If someone craps in your sandbox: 1. Light it on fire 2. Grab your shovel 3. Throw it back at them.
Colonel Xaven Decadence. RAZOR Alliance 43	Posted - 2012.06.27 09:59:00 - [24] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. The formula would have the current decloaking distance for the average cruiser remain about the same. Decloaking distance = 2000 / 200 * ship signature Type - Ship - Sig - Decloak distance F - Frig - 40 m - 400 m C - Cruiser - 150 m - 1.5 km C - Bustard - 170 m - 1.7 km F - Frig MWD - 200 m - 2 km BS - Dominix - 420 m - 4.2 km C - Cruiser MWD - 675 m - 6.8 km C - Bustard MWD - 1032 m - 10.3 km BS - Dominix MWD - 1375 m - 13.8 km CAP - Carrier - 2950 m - 29.5 km SCP - Mothership - 17780 m - 177.8 km SCP - Titan - 23700 m - 237 km You forgot all ship classes who are able to fit covert cloaks. So let's add them: F - CovOps - ? - 0 km BS - Blackops - ? - 0 km R - Recons - ? - 0 km C - Cloaky Strategic Cruiser - ? - 0 km C - Blockade Runners - ? - 0 km
Andy Landen Exploring Eagles 53	Posted - 2012.06.27 18:52:00 - [25] - Quote Colonel Xaven wrote: Andy Landen wrote: This is a proposal to change the current decloaking mechanics for all cloaking devices so that ships with larger ship signatures are decloaked from farther away and vv. Larger ships are harder to hide/easier to find, so cloaks should play to the ship's signature. The formula would have the current decloaking distance for the average cruiser remain about the same. Decloaking distance = 2000 / 200 * ship signature Type - Ship - Sig - Decloak distance F - Frig - 40 m - 400 m C - Cruiser - 150 m - 1.5 km C - Bustard - 170 m - 1.7 km F - Frig MWD - 200 m - 2 km BS - Dominix - 420 m - 4.2 km C - Cruiser MWD - 675 m - 6.8 km C - Bustard MWD - 1032 m - 10.3 km BS - Dominix MWD - 1375 m - 13.8 km CAP - Carrier - 2950 m - 29.5 km SCP - Mothership - 17780 m - 177.8 km SCP - Titan - 23700 m - 237 km You forgot all ship classes who are able to fit covert cloaks. So let's add them: F - CovOps - ? - 0 km BS - Blackops - ? - 0 km R - Recons - ? - 0 km C - Cloaky Strategic Cruiser - ? - 0 km C - Blockade Runners - ? - 0 km Did we ever consider giving the covert ops cloak a 100% reduction to sig radius while cloaked? I don't remember ever discussing that.

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

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,03s, ref 20250913/1636
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.