Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 21:59:00 -
[1]
First off, I See no problem with cloaking as is. AFK cloaking (blah blah blah) does not bother me... grow a pair.
However, It would be nice to have a system upgrade for SOV which send out a ping of sorts which can de-cloak ships for 90 seconds.
This is not to counter the AFK whiners, this is to give a legitimate bonus to SOV holders and a roll play of the scenario focusing on the fact the a sovereign system would try to develop a way to counter covert ops While, as much as I love it, I have to admit has no real counter.
- Require SOV 5 - Can only be used once every 60 minutes - maybe its an automatic or random ping every hour (+/-) or at time interval decided by holding alliance. - Requires ISK/fuel/energy/cap to ping.
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 22:11:00 -
[2]
Originally by: MasterEnt - Require SOV 5 - Can only be used once every 60 minutes
So not to hurt real cloakers... hmmm
Originally by: MasterEnt
- maybe its an automatic or random ping every hour (+/-) or at time interval decided by holding alliance.
Totally not for AFK Cloakers
Originally by: MasterEnt
- Requires ISK/fuel/energy/cap to ping.
To what reason? So it only reasonable against AFK Cloakers
Face it it's another AFK Cloak whine in General instead of Features and Idea's
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
July Shine
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 22:19:00 -
[3]
I like this idea a lot, i think it is a valid proposal and a possible solution and i hope to see it implemented.
To all the afk cloakers and people saying that it should stay as it is: everyone always talk of "RISK vs REWARD", so... where is the risk here? Where is the risk in stay 100% safe, untouchable, INVULNERABLE? Answer: there is NO risk.
AFK Cloaking Risk = 0% Reward = 100%
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 22:49:00 -
[4]
oh god, one of these again.
afk cloaking is fine, and yes, clearly you do have a problem with it. and yes, there is plenty of risk to operating behind enemy lines in a completely untanked ship.
|
Snowmann
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 22:56:00 -
[5]
Originally by: July Shine
AFK Cloaking Risk = 0% Reward = 100%
This would be more accurate to "afk cloaking"
Risk = 0% Reward = 0%
Hence, the name.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 23:11:00 -
[6]
afk cloakers don't deserve a single drop of fuel to be wasted on them
if you're in 0.0, just learn to live with them
|
|
CCP Jericho
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 03:05:00 -
[7]
Moved from General Discussion.
|
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 14:14:00 -
[8]
Edited by: MasterEnt on 27/10/2010 14:16:13
A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
I cloak all the time and I find it HILARIOUS that people freak out over "AFK" Cloaks. Especially since 1) You can't prove someone is AFK 2) You can't do a damn thing while cloaked 3) This is Eve 4) Falcon
B) The requirements are just suggestions or possible mixes. No real reason for any of them other than I don't think exposing covert operations should be easy or frequent.
But it seems within the context of roll play and system logistics that an alliance would be able to have a CHANCE of sniffing out covert operations in some of their more important systems. Right now there is no way to do that and as a roll-play tactic, its boring.
Make is expensive, make it limited, but make it fun.
|
Dave Daze
Minmatar Thor's Spite
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 14:18:00 -
[9]
No.
Grow a pair... oh wait..
/cloaks
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 14:21:00 -
[10]
Ohh noo - boo hoo - don't make EVE even MORE harder for me.
|
|
Sinner Cain
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 15:09:00 -
[11]
I would not have a problem with this with one aspect. The ping didnt uncloak the player , but did feed you his location. The ping would only return results after say 15 minutes. Basically like a moon probe. This way if the player is active his location would still not be compromised.
|
Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 19:01:00 -
[12]
The game should kick everyone off who is idle for more than 2 hours. --
|
Baaldor
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 21:11:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Whitehound The game should kick everyone off who is idle for more than 2 hours.
....eve goes dark....
Originally by: Alara IonStorm Where is Herschel......?
Dude...
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 21:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: MasterEnt A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
Can I be Frank, Shirley you can't be serious?
Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it.
Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive. |
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 21:36:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Sinner Cain I would not have a problem with this with one aspect. The ping didnt uncloak the player , but did feed you his location. The ping would only return results after say 15 minutes. Basically like a moon probe. This way if the player is active his location would still not be compromised.
I like this idea as well actually. But 15minutes is too often I think and who would get the location?
|
Baaldor
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 21:40:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: MasterEnt A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
Can I be Frank, Shirley you can't be serious?
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 23:06:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Baaldor
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: MasterEnt A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
Can I be Frank, Shirley you can't be serious?
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
wrong alt to post?;)
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 23:17:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 27/10/2010 23:19:41
Originally by: Sinner Cain This way if the player is active his location would still not be compromised.
Originally by: MasterEnt
I like this idea
Originally by: MasterEnt
A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
Originally by: MasterEnt
I like this idea
Originally by: MasterEnt
I like this idea
Originally by: Sinner Cain This way if the player is active his location would still not be compromised.
Originally by: MasterEnt
I like this idea
Busted AFK Cloak Whiner!
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
Baaldor
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.28 00:25:00 -
[19]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Baaldor
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: MasterEnt A) Ahh carp - No this is not an AFK Cloaker whine thread in disguise. I knew some extremist with little ability to see beyond the argument would claim otherwise.
Can I be Frank, Shirley you can't be serious?
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
wrong alt to post?;)
Yes, obvious alt is obvious.
Shirley
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.10.28 06:43:00 -
[20]
Originally by: MasterEnt First off, I See no problem with cloaking as is. AFK cloaking (blah blah blah) does not bother me... [...]
Great, so essentially there's really no good reason to support the rest of your cloaking nerf idea. Or did someone else hijack your keyboard after the first two sentences?
|
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.28 19:57:00 -
[21]
Edited by: MasterEnt on 28/10/2010 20:06:47
No someone hijacked the thread with alts and non-sense about trying to prove if I care about AFK cloaking, get over it.
Living with you must be painful.
|
KaiserSoze434
|
Posted - 2010.10.28 22:16:00 -
[22]
So you have no problem with AFK cloaking but want to see the game change to discourage it. And you don't care about AFK cloaking but you took the time to think through a solution to what you don't see as a problem and breach the topic you don't care about with a forum?
And now you're getting butt hurt because the forum you knew was ruthless when you posted called you on what is a pretty transparent and inconsistent post. "Aghast the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." |
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.29 21:20:00 -
[23]
Originally by: KaiserSoze434 So you have no problem with AFK cloaking but want to see the game change to discourage it. And you don't care about AFK cloaking but you took the time to think through a solution to what you don't see as a problem and breach the topic you don't care about with a forum?
And now you're getting butt hurt because the forum you knew was ruthless when you posted called you on what is a pretty transparent and inconsistent post.
You failed in the first 8 words.
Yes - I gave a suggestion. Just happens to affect who exactly? - People not playing the game at the moment? Great argument.
The fact is I just made a suggestion that scares you and your going b@tsh!t with red-herring accusations. It wasnÆt to ôfixö something thatÆs not broken, its just to add risk, which is what this game is all about.
I love you
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.10.29 23:51:00 -
[24]
Originally by: MasterEnt
[...]It wasnÆt to ôfixö something thatÆs not broken, its just to add risk, which is what this game is all about.
Ah Awesome! So you want to add risk? We ought to be able to agree then that Local Chat should be removed from Nullsec.
|
Geddings
|
Posted - 2010.10.30 00:15:00 -
[25]
no! dont decloak me! i think nothing should be changed to convert ops as it is. I think thats one of the reasons it makes it special. besides you still have a risk of being decloaked if your too close to someone or get in a warp bubble and are too close to another ship or something. And this would ONLY be useful for afk people... those who are cloaked and are active and get temporary decloaked can cloak up again or simply try to escape (since if they are smart they woudnt be close to other people).
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.30 02:49:00 -
[26]
Edited by: MasterEnt on 30/10/2010 02:53:42
Originally by: Xorv Ah Awesome! So you want to add risk? We ought to be able to agree then that Local Chat should be removed from Nullsec.
We do agree actually. I would do both ideas. Local is irritating and renders covert ops less fun. If I am truly on a covert mission, why the hell i should pop up in local at all. Its silly and un-immersive.
The only fun thing about local this IS that people go crazy and start whining about AFK cloakers and it does disrupt ratting/mining operations to a degree. I mean, if they don't know you are there, you cant tease them. But as roll-play in real covert-operations, Local is a tragedy.
Cloaking isn't difficult, I bust bubble camps in a proto-cloaked IteronV without a sweat, Covert-operations, and Counter-covert-operations is a different story, and thats what im talking about. Take it to the next level.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.10.30 06:24:00 -
[27]
Originally by: MasterEnt
We do agree actually. I would do both ideas. Local is irritating and renders covert ops less fun. If I am truly on a covert mission, why the hell i should pop up in local at all. Its silly and un-immersive.
Well in that case I would just put posting time into getting rid of Local Chat, because that needs to come first before any AFK cloak nerf, which is what your idea is without first removing Local. Well actually yours is a huge cloak nerf period, AFK or otherwise. But even a much more reasonable suggestion is just going to be shot down without Local Chat having already been removed.
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.10.31 06:07:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Xorv
Originally by: MasterEnt
We do agree actually. I would do both ideas. Local is irritating and renders covert ops less fun. If I am truly on a covert mission, why the hell i should pop up in local at all. Its silly and un-immersive.
Well in that case I would just put posting time into getting rid of Local Chat, because that needs to come first before any AFK cloak nerf, which is what your idea is without first removing Local. Well actually yours is a huge cloak nerf period, AFK or otherwise. But even a much more reasonable suggestion is just going to be shot down without Local Chat having already been removed.
Pu$$y
|
MasterEnt
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 16:04:00 -
[29]
Edited by: MasterEnt on 02/11/2010 16:09:08
Originally by: Xorv
Originally by: MasterEnt
We do agree actually. I would do both ideas. Local is irritating and renders covert ops less fun. If I am truly on a covert mission, why the hell i should pop up in local at all. Its silly and un-immersive.
Well in that case I would just put posting time into getting rid of Local Chat, because that needs to come first before any AFK cloak nerf, which is what your idea is without first removing Local. Well actually yours is a huge cloak nerf period, AFK or otherwise. But even a much more reasonable suggestion is just going to be shot down without Local Chat having already been removed.
How about this - YOU spend time posting on protectionist ideas, and Ill worry about my own time posting new and dynamic ones.
The proposed idea only affects a small number of systems and only when activated. How is that a cloaking nerf? It does not affect the mods, ships or skills in any way.
Ohh nooo -only people who are not playing the game at the moment are the only ones who really going to be at risk - ohh noo
PU$$Y
By your definition, maybe we should kill all weapons on the ships that get targeted first.
|
BoBoZoBo
Foundation Sodalitas XX
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 14:16:00 -
[30]
Edited by: BoBoZoBo on 03/11/2010 14:22:20
LOL _ Love the forums
I endorse this. Sounds nice... It would be like submarine hunting, like covert ops should be I LOVE being able to freak people out bears indefinitely, but I have to admit this is kind of cool.
- Remove Local - Allow pinging in SOME SOV systems
=========================
Minister of Propaganda - Operator 9 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |