| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
   |
Posted - 2010.09.15 22:11:00 -
[1]
People don't like afk cloakers and afk cloakers don't like people... but still what game mechanics could promote active playing instead of just having a character hanging forever cloaked without any concerns but disconnects?
My suggestion
All cloaks:
Give the modules 60 hitpoints
Make them take heat damage just for being activated
at a rate of 1 damage pr minute a cloaker is able to be cloaked for an hour
All the whiners need to HTFU (see the ccp music video) but Eve has never been about doing something without having drawbacks...
Just a suggestion - plz think twice before posting response and be civil...
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.09.15 22:22:00 -
[2]
No but thank you for trying to kill long term Covert Ops Roams!
--
Alara's Law!
As an online discussion on EVE ships grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Dominix approaches 1 |
Rahnim
|
Posted - 2010.09.15 22:40:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Alara IonStorm
No but thank you for trying to kill long term Covert Ops Roams!
bring nanite repair paste. :) it doesnt take up much cargo space so something in the lines of heat dmg could be viable, so every 60 mins (as above suggested, you would need to repair the cloak module (it shouldnt break though, or should it if you use it for too long? "that means you would have to repair it at a station/outpost)
it wouldn't take long to repair the cloak again, just like other modules that take heat dmg.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.09.15 23:18:00 -
[4]
Yes, I clearly deserve to carebear in null in peace. It's null, after all, it's supposed to be completely safe, unlike highsec, where random idiots gank you. Every single pathetic stealth cloak nerf should be implemented so that my risk-averting tendencies can be soothed. I am deserving of those entitlements.
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 00:26:00 -
[5]
Oh, BDEAL, where have your standards gone.
Is this a phase every fledgling 0.0 'alliance' must go through?
|
Lemmy Kravitz
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 00:55:00 -
[6]
go back under the bridge you came from troll
Implement my idea Destroyer only probe launcher with destroyer only probes that can probe cloaked ships as well as normal ships. AFK cloaker problem solved, cloaks don't get touched, only people that get punished are the morons that go step away from their computer outside of station, or POS.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 01:07:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Lemmy Kravitz
go back under the bridge you came from troll
Implement my idea Destroyer only probe launcher with destroyer only probes that can probe cloaked ships as well as normal ships. AFK cloaker problem solved, cloaks don't get touched, only people that get punished are the morons that go step away from their computer outside of station, or POS.
Lol fail.
|
Solostrom
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 01:35:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
People don't like afk cloakers and afk cloakers don't like people... but still what game mechanics could promote active playing instead of just having a character hanging forever cloaked without any concerns but disconnects?
My suggestion
All cloaks:
Give the modules 60 hitpoints
Make them take heat damage just for being activated
at a rate of 1 damage pr minute a cloaker is able to be cloaked for an hour
All the whiners need to HTFU (see the ccp music video) but Eve has never been about doing something without having drawbacks...
Just a suggestion - plz think twice before posting response and be civil...
oh look another nerf cloak thread!
ZOMG with ironic use of HTFU! Take your own advise!
|
Bhattran
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 01:50:00 -
[9]
Liar.
I do like AFK Cloakers, I plan to be one when I grow up, and people will like me and as a person who will be an AFK cloaker I do like some people and will continue to like some people.
I suggest when you notice an AFK cloaker you dock up and talk with your fellow AFK Cloaker haters about how horrible it is, form a support group for hating AFK cloakers and how it makes you feel like less of a person/player/pilot.
PS: Next time you make general arguments that are false and call people whiners don't suggest people be civil FFS.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fanboys would make great cult members. |
|
CCP Jericho
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:11:00 -
[10]
Inappropriate post removed.
|
|
|
|
Allestin Villimar
Zebra Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:12:00 -
[11]
I'm against afk cloakers, but this is one really terrible suggestion.
...in bed. |
Ned Black
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 06:43:00 -
[12]
The problem is not that people are AFK with cloaks... the problem is that you can see them being AFK with cloaks.
Delay local and the AFK cloakers will no longer have any effect... but that has been said thousands and thousands of times...
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 08:02:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
People don't like afk cloakers and afk cloakers don't like people...
Just a suggestion - plz think twice before posting response and be civil...
My suggestion is for people who are worried about AFK cloakers to realize they should only be worried about active cloakers, and then realize that the problem they face is actually the super cap fleet that get hot dropped in their ratting drake.
The way to address that issue is to reduce the cycle time of cyno projectors, make them only visible to fleet at the end of the cycle, and increase the time required to jump to the cyno. With 20s warning, even a heavy plated BS has the ability to warp out before the fleet arrives.
No need to add nonsense restrictions to cloaks.
--
[Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 11:58:00 -
[14]
Nice to see so many constructive critiques on these once civilized and friendly forums.
BDEAL has nothing to do with this - We as an alliance don't mind getting a visit from people wanting to actively have fun...
This idea is absolutely not about nerfing cloaks. Bomber and recon pilots should be allowed to sneak around, get their oportunities etc etc. But for them to find a secure spot ever 45-60 minutes to repair their cloak with nanite paste doesn't seem worse than having people in a system spending 45-60 minutes trying to find such pilots not even knowing of it's an afk-alt.
Even the psychology of having a cloaker in an emey system is by all means what makes Eve a nice and exciting place - But that cloaker should not be allowed to sit in a system from downtime to downtime without having a player in active control.
Pinky
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Grarr Dexx
Amarr
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 16:27:00 -
[15]
I'd gladly accept the idea of a cloak 'nerf' when they introduce delayed local. It's a stupid idea that we have so-called covert reconaissance ships but everybody knows they're there! Nothing covert at all.
|
Flesh Slurper
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 18:23:00 -
[16]
Lol.. a terrible idea.
Cloaks don't have drawbacks already?
Do you even use a cloak? Have you read what non-covert cloaks do to your ship? Do you see the lowered offensive and defensive stats of ships that can use covert ops cloak?
If they are AFK.. then they cant hurt you. If they are active, then pop them when they uncloak.
Remove local.. Problem solved. |
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 18:32:00 -
[17]
Eh. While this is really similar to my own personal preference of introducing a fuel cost I don't like the idea that it literally damages the module. Wait too long by accident and the module is completely destroyed? and the nature of heat damage means that it is randomly dispersed across the rack depending on proximity to the heated module.
All in all, the idea is okay, but it has a few side effects that aren't exactly wonderful for cloaky pilots and could cause some problems.
(though I wouldn't mind nanite repair paste being worth more, Hah)
|
Slimy Worm
Cyan Wolf
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 18:53:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Slimy Worm on 16/09/2010 18:54:49
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
People don't like afk cloakers...
snip
gb2wowkthxbai
---------------
|
Alina Zalo
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 19:13:00 -
[19]
I think the heat damage idea is really good.
Almost every module in the game uses something, and gives something. You shouldn't get something for nothing. Being completely undetectable seems like a big something. Now i understand the drawbacks to lock time and scan res. However the heat damage Idea should really be given some thought.
60min to seems reasonable, meaning you need to de-cloak sometime before you damage your cloaking device beyond repair and paste it up with very little cost in nanite paste, this process would only take one about 15sec of time de-cloaked. However it would require the "cloakie" to be somewhat more active, like checking his eve client atleast every 55min or so.
Considering the rest of the game requires interaction of some kind regularly, this would be a logical step. I have another Idea I want to post in its own thread. I dont know if anyone has thought of it, but it seems like a cool one.
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 21:44:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Rhadia
Eh. While this is really similar to my own personal preference of introducing a fuel cost I don't like the idea that it literally damages the module. Wait too long by accident and the module is completely destroyed? and the nature of heat damage means that it is randomly dispersed across the rack depending on proximity to the heated module.
All in all, the idea is okay, but it has a few side effects that aren't exactly wonderful for cloaky pilots and could cause some problems.
(though I wouldn't mind nanite repair paste being worth more, Hah)
You raise a good point. The pilgrim and curse are basically bound by their high slots, the fallout from the heat damage would damage/destroy their purpose.
|
|
|
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 23:34:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Grarr Dexx
Originally by: Rhadia
Eh. While this is really similar to my own personal preference of introducing a fuel cost I don't like the idea that it literally damages the module. Wait too long by accident and the module is completely destroyed? and the nature of heat damage means that it is randomly dispersed across the rack depending on proximity to the heated module.
All in all, the idea is okay, but it has a few side effects that aren't exactly wonderful for cloaky pilots and could cause some problems.
(though I wouldn't mind nanite repair paste being worth more, Hah)
You raise a good point. The pilgrim and curse are basically bound by their high slots, the fallout from the heat damage would damage/destroy their purpose.
Exactly. Also, to not leave them out... Commonly supercapitals use cloaks to protect themselves when not being used... I'm just wondering how much nanite repair paste it would take to repair a rack of capital mods.
|
BelinuS
Madhatters Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 23:45:00 -
[22]
I like this idie and i think some people dont get this or haven't read this to the end 1 hour is enough for a cloaker pilot to do everything he needs + mutch more and even the a super uses a cloak it will not use more nanite paste then other ships that uses cloak.
it¦s the module that get damage and it is not a capital module.
litle more add or some comments from people with idies would work to complete this :)
trained as a Suicider but lives with the madness |
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.16 23:54:00 -
[23]
Originally by: BelinuS
I like this idie and i think some people dont get this or haven't read this to the end 1 hour is enough for a cloaker pilot to do everything he needs + mutch more and even the a super uses a cloak it will not use more nanite paste then other ships that uses cloak.
it¦s the module that get damage and it is not a capital module.
litle more add or some comments from people with idies would work to complete this :)
You don't seem to know how heat damage functions in Eve- it's a little more complicated than that. Heat damage is applied randomly across the entire rack of whatever module is overheated, effecting modules closest to it first (modules that have been fitted in slots next to it). Meaning I could activate an overheated microwarpdrive and burn up the shield booster next to it before the MWD even takes damage in rare occasions.
Also, I don't like the idea of forcing a bomber pilot to decloak to repair, as it would lead to some difficult situations of finding a target, having to decloak (making your presence known on D-Scan or probes, and possibly ruining your chance) to repair, and then cloaking again so you can simply initiate the attack.
Too complicated.
The fuel cost accomplishes the same thing without causing any side effects- It's all localized to a single module, and only effects the time that module will be used, and nothing else.
|
John Comer
|
Posted - 2010.09.17 09:25:00 -
[24]
one of the best idea's i have seen is the addition of a fuel bay to the ships who can use a covert ops cloak
Big enough to hold enough fuel to operate for several days, but not so big that you could just go and afk cloak for weeks on end.
this woudl allow to shut down enemie systems at war times and require some more support in doing so
|
Etriana Morgan
Danneskjold Repossessions
|
Posted - 2010.09.17 10:25:00 -
[25]
Go back to high sec. That is what nullsec would become if you nerf cloaks ... risk are already low enough compared to the rewards in null sec. Removing the afk cloakers just makes isk making easier.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 13:37:00 -
[26]
Making isk has absolutely no part of this suggestion - afaik many people in 0.0 use the cloaks to protect them from getting killed.
I think this idea will force claoking ships to be more active and will generate more combat and activity.
And in respect to having your racks burned out by cloaking - CCP certainly have options to find a balanced implemention of this idea if they find it to enhance/improve/add to the active gameplay of Eve.
Claiming to have a right of afk gaming 23/7 (hence having an impact on other people playing the game) without having any consequences or drawbacks is like telling me terrorists shold be allowed to move around freely in the world as long they're only planning to attack you... Bad analogy but I just see too much whining about a rather harmless suggestion.
Cloaks ofcourse is not a priority for CCP since they work fine - But that doesn't mean it's perfect as is.
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Hilda B9
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 13:45:00 -
[27]
how about making you not show up in local if you are cloaked this applies even when you just jump in. cov op ships would be sweet then and you could catch those cloakers in 0.0 before the warp off and cloak.
its win win for every one
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 14:12:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 20/09/2010 14:13:39
Originally by: Etriana Morgan
Go back to high sec. That is what nullsec would become if you nerf cloaks ... risk are already low enough compared to the rewards in null sec. Removing the afk cloakers just makes isk making easier.
0.0 has less risk than high-sec or even the gimped low-sec. Between jump bridges and cyno-jammers the worst that can happen is that you run into a hostile bubble in-between bridges which should be avoidable with a minimum of intel.
And with the new constantly spwning plexes raw ISK income can not be matched by anything short of cornering a market or scamming. Minimal risk + Huge profits = Current null-sec.
Please explain how nerfing the omni-present cloaking macro Ravens translates into ISK making becoming easier? Is requiring people to actually play the game really that big of a problem?
AFK cloakers are infinitely less impacted by a change to cloaks since they are not nearly as many.
The current "penalty" for fitting a cloak is ridiculously weak and can be completely negated by a single midslot .. cloaks are way too good for the benefit they provide so something has to be done.
@OP: For any kind of wide support you need to exempt all ships meant to be using cloaks; that is all covert hulls plus the black ops.
AFK cloakers will still be around but at least they will be using ships that are actually balanced towards that purpose (read: crap tanks and/or mediocre dps).
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 14:28:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Please explain how nerfing the omni-present cloaking macro Ravens translates into ISK making becoming easier? Is requiring people to actually play the game really that big of a problem?
You can be pretty sure that the OPs problem are not cloaky macro ravens.
Quote:
AFK cloakers are infinitely less impacted by a change to cloaks since they are not nearly as many.
His "loss" in ISK making comes from the claim "we cant use our system because of the cloaky"
Quote:
The current "penalty" for fitting a cloak is ridiculously weak and can be completely negated by a single midslot
oh really ... which single mid slot module compensates for speed under cloak, scan res and the huge targetting delay at the same time.... just curious.
Quote:
.. cloaks are way too good for the benefit they provide so something has to be done.
they provide a single benefit for *3* penalties.
|
Mal Lokrano
Gallente
The Executives
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 15:02:00 -
[30]
Let me think about this...
Umm no.
I swear afk cloaking threads should die a horrible death. We finally get one to die and another pops up. Are you guys spreading posting herpes?
_____
When going to a party with wine, women, and song. Always ascertain the vintage of the first two.
Your friendly neighborhood pod liberator. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |