EVE Search - [Issue] AFK Nuisancing

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] AFK Nuisancing

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.10 19:53:00 - [1] Edited by: ashofski on 10/02/2011 19:53:38 AFK Nuisancing: fitting a cloaked ship with a covert cyno (to negate cyno jammed systems) and being logged in 23/7 in the same system with little to no activity. The Problem: This has become an absurdly obnoxious way to completely shutdown almost all industrial activity in a 0.0 system. it is virtually 0 risk and is done afk with great rewards, which is the opposite of what ccp claim to want for the game. On the occasion that the person is actually at the keyboard they can quickly scan the system to see if there is anything for them to hot drop and after 1 hot drop almost all activity will have to be stopped in the system because you can never tell when the person is actually there or not. There is no way to attack, decloak, scan down, or in any way counter this except when the cyno is lit. This means you would have to scan down the cyno form a fleet and hope that the fleet could get to and pop the cyno ship before it could cloak back up, which you would have to do under fire. even if you DID manage to pop it, it would take almost no time for the pilot to refit another claoky with a covert cyno and get right back there. Solution: I'm sure there are a lot of players who have thought of ways to remedy this, the most compelling i have heard so far is simply making the cloaking devise shut off every so often, perhaps giving it a very long cycle time but requiring it to be reactivated. Another idea might be might be using a pos mod to decloak all the ships in system allowing an afker to be scanned down but an active player to cloak back up before they can be located. Or, bring back the system scanning pos mod and allowing it to scan down cloaked ships. I'm sure there are many other solutions and i don't know which one should be used. But i do know that this is not something that should be allowed to continue. it is completely impossible to defend against, requires little skill, is NO risk to the person doing it, and offers massive rewards by either giving easy kills, or shutting down a system that would otherwise be producing isk, or both. -I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to sit in a system all day long cloaked up if you want, I'm saying you should have to actually sit there, not log on once a day then go about your business in RL or on another character.
Ephemeron BeerTia Maniacs	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:25:00 - [2] The main problem here is the hot drop mechanics, not AFK cloaking Current cyno hot drops are completely overpowered - they are instantenous and unscoutable. There needs to be some delay between cyno activation and ships appearing. There needs to be some way to know what's coming - at least as soon as cyno activates. And there should be options for mobile cyno jammers, that can block even cov ops cynos. This isn't about cloaking at all.
Kryhane Gallente Peripheral Madness	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:31:00 - [3] What's cloaked, can't hurt you. Use this as an opportunity to protect your industrial assets while they are at risk in space.
ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:38:00 - [4] @ ephemeron: THIS thread is about the inability to decloak or scan down a cloaked ship that has no one behind the wheel, if you feel cynos are over powered feel free to MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD explaining why. @ kryhane: what? if your asking what being cloaked is: its when your ship is invisible to other players. I couldn't understand the rest of your post, sorry
Zemfadel	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:45:00 - [5] I agree its complete crap that someone can just sit in a system cloaked all day every day and never actually be there.
Burseg Sardaukar Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:47:00 - [6] Edited by: Burseg Sardaukar on 10/02/2011 20:47:30 Nerfing scouts isn't particularly fair, but I feel ships fit with cloaks (non-covert ops) should possibly require some type of fuel or be able to be scanned after sitting still for too long. This allows covert ops ships to do their jobs, while ratting drake bots can't warp to a planet and perma-cloak on every person entering a system. I think a better solution to the heightened alert would truly be a spin-up cycle needed for cynos, or even a cyno mass limit. I understand that in the role-play sense a cyno is a "beacon" that the drives of the ships lock onto, but I feel that as a ship jumps to the becon, its mass should start to be reduced. This would make cynos deployment and jumping more tactical and less "everything I have is coming through at you in 1 second." On top of that, Supercaps should require a special cyno to bring them to the scene, like a 1 minute spin-up on a module that MUST be fit to a carrier @ least.
t'raq mardon	Posted - 2011.02.10 20:58:00 - [7] Edited by: t''raq mardon on 10/02/2011 20:58:08
ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.10 21:17:00 - [8] Originally by: Burseg Sardaukar Edited by: Burseg Sardaukar on 10/02/2011 20:47:30 Nerfing scouts isn't particularly fair, but I feel ships fit with cloaks (non-covert ops) should possibly require some type of fuel or be able to be scanned after sitting still for too long. This allows covert ops ships to do their jobs, while ratting drake bots can't warp to a planet and perma-cloak on every person entering a system. I think a better solution to the heightened alert would truly be a spin-up cycle needed for cynos, or even a cyno mass limit. I understand that in the role-play sense a cyno is a "beacon" that the drives of the ships lock onto, but I feel that as a ship jumps to the becon, its mass should start to be reduced. This would make cynos deployment and jumping more tactical and less "everything I have is coming through at you in 1 second." On top of that, Supercaps should require a special cyno to bring them to the scene, like a 1 minute spin-up on a module that MUST be fit to a carrier @ least. I agree that cloaking scouts should not be affected at all (or at least very little) by whatever mechanic is implemented. The decloaking pos mod would absolutely be able to be used for decloaking scouts so perhaps it could have a long cool down timer, maybe 6 hours, this would limit its ability to disrupt scouts pretty considerably the issue isn't with cloaking drake botters (another subject all together) its with covert ops ships fitted with covert ops cloaking devices and either a cyno or a covert cyno. They are impossible to counter and cause huge problems for the people they are harassing without having to even be there while they do so, much less having to put anything on the line. Is a great tactic to employ but I feel that you should at least have to be paying a little attention to the client while you do so, not out shopping for groceries. again, not talking about cyno mechanics. talking about the ability of a player to log on, cloak, and walk away. disrupting the ability of other players to play without having to actually be playing himself. cyno mechanics is an interesting subject, but not of this thread. this thread is for ideas about countering afk cloaking, and support/criticism of those ideas
Ephemeron BeerTia Maniacs	Posted - 2011.02.10 21:37:00 - [9] ashofski, how about this then: if you gain the ability to scan down and decloak people in deep 0.0 I should gain the ability to eject carebears out of stations and POS shields, especially when they are AFK. Fair deal?
Tethys Atreides	Posted - 2011.02.10 21:39:00 - [10] Pooped on because scouts have already gotten the shaft enough from CCP...

Frank Shitlitz	Posted - 2011.02.10 22:00:00 - [11] Originally by: ashofski again, not talking about cyno mechanics. talking about the ability of a player to log on, cloak, and walk away. disrupting the ability of other players to play without having to actually be playing himself. cyno mechanics is an interesting subject, but not of this thread. this thread is for ideas about countering afk cloaking, and support/criticism of those ideas Maybe removing all mention of cyno lighting and being hotdropped from your post would be a better way to articulate your problem. Having a nuetral in sys wreaks havoc on a botting operation. This should be done away with. Just out of curiosity: do you regularly have to scan down the cyno-lighter whilst being hot dropped? I would think that if your being hot dropped the cyno ship would be there on grid with you.
Red Raider Evil Dead L.L.C. DEM0N HUNTERS	Posted - 2011.02.10 22:08:00 - [12] Originally by: Ephemeron ashofski, how about this then: if you gain the ability to scan down and decloak people in deep 0.0 I should gain the ability to eject carebears out of stations and POS shields, especially when they are AFK. Fair deal? So someone docked in a station or clearly visible inside of a POS is somehow causing you, your corp, or your alliance damage how? In the mean time you have a mechanic for killing people as a single bomber or by cynoing in friendlies at any time of your choosing with little to no warning depending upon the location of the people in system since you rarely have to use probes to find someone and even then if you bookmark the plex's, hidden belts, and exploration sites after downtime you still get free easy kills with no warning. Cloaker griefing is the biggest carebear profession in eve. Hell its riskier to undock from Jita in a hauler that's empty.
Larkonis Trassler NibbleTek Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.02.10 22:08:00 - [13] No. Trolls and Tribulations: Musings of a Spaceship Politician
Andreus Ixiris Gallente Mixed Metaphor	Posted - 2011.02.10 22:58:00 - [14] No fueled cloaks. No cycle time. CCP thinks AFK Nuisancing is working as intended and for once I totally believe them - this thread proves it. ----- Andreus Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.10 23:29:00 - [15] Originally by: Frank **litz Maybe removing all mention of cyno lighting and being hotdropped from your post would be a better way to articulate your problem. Having a nuetral in sys wreaks havoc on a botting operation. This should be done away with. Just out of curiosity: do you regularly have to scan down the cyno-lighter whilst being hot dropped? I would think that if your being hot dropped the cyno ship would be there on grid with you. i am all for a player flying his ship into a system that has people in it to disrupt what ever it is they are doing, be it botting or running anoms or mining or whatever else. The issue is that currently, once you have moved your ship to that system you can simply cloak and walk out of the room, logging back in and cloaking after down time. Effectively costing other players hundreds of millions of isk with absolutely no risk or even interaction on your part. If you want to sit in a system and disrupt what other players are doing i think you should at least have to be at the computer reactivating your cloaking device or something. it isn't right that people can just walk away from the computer with no fear of dieing in 0.0. As far as scanning, a fleet would not be able to warp to a covert cyno and would likely not be put together fast enough to warp to the pilot that was being hot dropped. Originally by: Ephemeron ashofski, how about this then: if you gain the ability to scan down and decloak people in deep 0.0 I should gain the ability to eject carebears out of stations and POS shields, especially when they are AFK. Fair deal? 1. I'm not the one to be bargaining with since i'm just pointing out what i think is an issue with the game not the one who would be fixing it. 2. you are again bring up a subject that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this thread, start a thread regarding your ideas and i will comment on them there. 3. feel free to continue to bump this thread to the top while making yourself look stupid
Frank Shitlitz	Posted - 2011.02.10 23:44:00 - [16] Originally by: ashofski it isn't right that people can just walk away from the computer with no fear of dieing in 0.0. Like in a station? Originally by: ashofski would likely not be put together fast enough to warp to the pilot that was being hot dropped. Oh you dont protect your corp m8's by having combat capable ships on grid? Nice corp. The commraderie (sp?) is heartwarming.
ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.10 23:59:00 - [17] Edited by: ashofski on 10/02/2011 23:59:52 Originally by: Frank **litz Originally by: ashofski it isn't right that people can just walk away from the computer with no fear of dieing in 0.0. Like in a station? Originally by: ashofski would likely not be put together fast enough to warp to the pilot that was being hot dropped. Oh you dont protect your corp m8's by having combat capable ships on grid? Nice corp. The commraderie (sp?) is heartwarming. not possible for a neut to dock in a player station, and even if they were you would know where they were and when they were actively trying to kill you as apposed to afk. no i don't routinely assemble fleets large enough to take on a 15+ man fleet and stage them on grid with me just for the purpose of running a few sanctums. but that has nothing to do with the point of the thread. if you have an actual point to make in regards to your opinion of the subject of the thread, ie. i think afk cloaking should continue to be aloud because..., please make it. your assumptions of how my corp operates and your comparison of cloaking and docking are completely irrelevant.
Larkonis TrassIer State Breast Inspectorate	Posted - 2011.02.11 00:16:00 - [18] Edited by: Larkonis TrassIer on 11/02/2011 00:25:54 Edited by: Larkonis TrassIer on 11/02/2011 00:16:29 I will expand on my previous point. Given the penchant for people running industrial or ratting ops in 0.0 to hide behind Cyno Jammers and JB networks at the end of a single pipe dogleg with 30 bubbles on the in gate there is literally NO OTHER WAY to have an affect on day to day alliance operations or get the chance of a kill. Black ops don't have a long range, good intel channels and regular patrols will warn of threats as they emerge, not when they drop on you. Add enemy black ops pilots to your address books. Find out where they live. Have an AFK cloaker watching THEM so you know if they're forming up to come and get you. HERE I MADE YOU A HANDY FLOW CHART OF ACTIONS AND OPTIONS TO TAKE IN THE EVENT OF AN AFK CLOAKER ENTERING LOCAL Trolls and Tribulations: Musings of a Spaceship Politician
Ephemeron BeerTia Maniacs	Posted - 2011.02.11 00:30:00 - [19] can't wait till local is finally nerfed these 0.0 carebears need to be purged back to high sec. Just reading these whines makes me want to strangle them with my bare hands.
Gizznitt Malikite Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2011.02.11 01:58:00 - [20] You do realize that a cloak change will NOT solve the problem of afk camping a system. People can also camp it with an unprobeable cyno ship. That's why many of the best solutions to these attacks revolve more on the cyno mechanic rather than cloaking! For every cloaky ratter camper there are 3 mostly afk cloaky intel eyes which your going to mess with. Additionally, given the potential awards from living in null sec there aught to be plenty of risks!!!! Try to find a solutions that provides a middle ground between the hunter and the hunted.

ashofski	Posted - 2011.02.11 05:58:00 - [21] Edited by: ashofski on 11/02/2011 06:02:04 Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer Edited by: Larkonis TrassIer on 11/02/2011 00:25:54 Edited by: Larkonis TrassIer on 11/02/2011 00:16:29 I will expand on my previous point. Given the penchant for people running industrial or ratting ops in 0.0 to hide behind Cyno Jammers and JB networks at the end of a single pipe dogleg with 30 bubbles on the in gate there is literally NO OTHER WAY to have an affect on day to day alliance operations or get the chance of a kill. i agree that cloaking up in a system is a very good way to disrupt industrial operation. I believe this is the 3rd time that i have said that i think its a perfectly legitimate tactic. The use of black ops and covert cynos has been a great addition to the game imo. But being able to walk away from your computer knowing that you are in no danger of losing your ship while it floats out in 0.0 space is garbage. if you are logged on to eve and your ship isn't in a station you should be in danger of losing it. The players running anoms, mining, doing patrols, sitting in fleets, gate camping, pos bashing, and doing whatever else are at the computer while doing it, why don't you have to be? and its doesn't matter if there are 1,000 bubbles on a gate that wouldn't add any more danger to a cloaky ship getting into the system than 1. Originally by: Gizznitt Malikite You do realize that a cloak change will NOT solve the problem of afk camping a system. People can also camp it with an unprobeable cyno ship. That's why many of the best solutions to these attacks revolve more on the cyno mechanic rather than cloaking! For every cloaky ratter camper there are 3 mostly afk cloaky intel eyes which your going to mess with. Additionally, given the potential awards from living in null sec there aught to be plenty of risks!!!! Try to find a solutions that provides a middle ground between the hunter and the hunted. Haven't run into an issue with unprobeable ships before but a very good point that i hadn't thought about before. thank you and the reason i started this thread was to not only bring attention to the issue but to allow a forum for discussion of what the fairest way would be to deal with the problem. I feel that forcing the cloaker to have to press F1 to reactivate his cloak occasionally shouldn't disrupt anyone from using a cloaking ship unless they are doing so without actually being at the keyboard Originally by: Ephemeron can't wait till local is finally nerfed these 0.0 carebears need to be purged back to high sec. Just reading these whines makes me want to strangle them with my bare hands. maybe you should spend less time trolling the forums and afking waiting for someone to give you an easy kill of a pve ship and more time actually fighting pvpers, it would make you seem much less lame, both on the forums and the killboards. Its pretty entertaining to see how the people doing most of the pointless complaining are the ones saying those with pointed issues are whiners.
Red Raider Caldari Evil Dead L.L.C. DEM0N HUNTERS	Posted - 2011.02.11 18:01:00 - [22] Originally by: ashofski i agree that cloaking up in a system is a very good way to disrupt industrial operation. I believe this is the 3rd time that i have said that i think its a perfectly legitimate tactic. The use of black ops and covert cynos has been a great addition to the game imo. But being able to walk away from your computer knowing that you are in no danger of losing your ship while it floats out in 0.0 space is garbage. if you are logged on to eve and your ship isn't in a station you should be in danger of losing it. The players running anoms, mining, doing patrols, sitting in fleets, gate camping, pos bashing, and doing whatever else are at the computer while doing it, why don't you have to be? and its doesn't matter if there are 1,000 bubbles on a gate that wouldn't add any more danger to a cloaky ship getting into the system than 1. Because they can't kill***** people that see them log on. There is no warning however that they sat down at their computer and god forbid they fight within the same confines everyone else does.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2011.02.11 19:21:00 - [23] Not supported. Cloaking is fine. AFKing is fine. Local and cynos are overpowered.
Lykouleon Bad Kitty Inc.	Posted - 2011.02.11 20:36:00 - [24] Is it me or does this thread appear every other week with the same exact numbers of responses heavily favoring not changing the mechanic? Quote: ImRedYoureDead > carebearing is when you make the other person's ship explode, right? ImRedYoureDead > I think they're officers or something ImRedYoureDead > they got names, they got to die
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.11 20:37:00 - [25] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 11/02/2011 20:44:26 Originally by: Ephemeron can't wait till local is finally nerfed these 0.0 carebears need to be purged back to high sec. Just reading these whines makes me want to strangle them with my bare hands. The funny thing is that if you were some how able to force those players you don't like (ie the "carebears") back in to high sec you'd then be whining to CCP to force them back to you so you could viagra-up your killboard. Your idiotic inference that docked AFK players are some how causing a combat threat on a system shows that either a) You don't understand the problem, or b) You do, and are pusrposely red-herring the issue. My bet is on (b), but meh. You never can really tell on these forums. On a different note, maybe if CCP were to remove local and make it so that predator has the overwhelming avantage over prey then predators can sooner (rather than later) over-hunt lo/null sec space leaving them bored out of their minds and with nothing else to pump up their epeens, eventually driving them out of the game. Either way, carebears win . Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Ephemeron BeerTia Maniacs	Posted - 2011.02.11 21:34:00 - [26] MatrixSkye Mk2, personally I don't care much for killboard The main point I was making is that staying AFK cloaked in space is exactly same thing as staying AFK docked, or AFK at POS In all cases you appear in local chat channel but you are 100% safe and don't need to be at the keyboard. The root of the issue here is the face in local, that's what it all boils down to. No face in local - no AFK cloaker problem. And as I also said: if you are willing to give tools to kill AFK cloakers in space, then it would make sense to also provide tools to kill AFK docked people and AFK POSed up people. As long as they are AFK, it should be possible to kill them. Right? On other hand, if you don't think that's right, if you don't think that AFK docked people should be forced out of their stations and die, then you have no right to demand the same thing to be done to AFK cloakers.
CommanderData211	Posted - 2011.02.11 22:15:00 - [27] I think a rather eloquent solution would be to have a spool up timer for regular cyno's once a ship decloaks. The argument has been made that while a cloaker is AFK in a system he can't hurt you. This is a valid point, but the fact remains that you can never tell when a cloaker is simply scouting or preparing to hot-drop you. The cloak mechanic seems fine the way that it is, and griefing is working as intended, but it seems rather silly that someone can go into enemy territory, cloak up and then drop a cyno almost immediately upon decloaking. This gives the defender no real opportunity to counter a hot drop. I say, change the cyno mechanic in relation to cloaking, not cloaking itself. P.S. I feel that covert cyno's should be able to be lit immediately upon decloaking.
Larkonis Trassler NibbleTek Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.02.11 22:38:00 - [28] Delayed from entering 'local' for 60 seconds after entering a system. Characters in cloaked ships no longer show up in local. No need to worry about AFK cloakers bro. Trolls and Tribulations: Musings of a Spaceship Politician
Gizznitt Malikite Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2011.02.11 23:01:00 - [29] Originally by: Ephemeron The main point I was making is that staying AFK cloaked in space is exactly same thing as staying AFK docked, or AFK at POS AFK in station is definitely not the same thing, as a person in station Poses no threat and is only applicable to a relatively small number of NPC systems. A person AFK in a POS leaves a potential avenue for recourse (Kill the POS). There is no avenue for recourse from an AFK cloaker, and they DO represents a legitimate threat to carebear as soon as they return to the keyboard. Originally by: Ephemeron The root of the issue here is the face in local, that's what it all boils down to. No face in local - no AFK cloaker problem. While your vulgar solution would solve the problem, it is NOT the root of the issue. The root of the issue is the balance between risk and reward. Anyone that has carebeared in nullsec knows that it provides the easiest venue for isk generation. To balance it, it is supposed to be fairly dangerous with a significant amount of risk. Since it is hard to both carebear and pewpew at the same time, the carebears want an avenue of recourse against all forms of risk. A good solution needs to be a middle ground where the cattle with horns can fend off a wolf. Local is the largest intel tool in the game, which provides benefits far beyond protecting nullsec carebears. Before you remove it, we'd need a much better alternative to intel gather beyond the onboard scanner. I very much support a 10-20s delay between entering local and appearing in local, but not the removal of local. Covert ops, Stealth Bombers, Recons, and covert t3's are not extremely powerful ships. Two ratting BS's can make short work of any one of these ship types. This is why a spool up timer on a cyno is a HUGE boon to the defenders. If you can't kill an immobile cyno target in 30-45s, then you deserve to die. You don't have complete safety (and you shouldn't given null sec rewards), but you can have a reasonable recourse to a hotdrop, especially when you carebear in groups!!! Another reasonable solution I can think of that doesn't involve nerfing cloaks is to increase the intel from local. Create an "Inactive" icon that appears on all inactive members in system. It would appear on anyone docked in a station and anyone that doesn't interact with their UI for 10+ minutes. It would disappear whenever someone undocks, or whenever someone interacts with their UI (i.e. warps, scans, changes course, etc.). I think either of these solutions are better than forcing a covert ship to be at the keyboard and alert most of the time they are online.
Ephemeron BeerTia Maniacs	Posted - 2011.02.12 00:32:00 - [30] Edited by: Ephemeron on 12/02/2011 00:34:42 Quote: AFK in station is definitely not the same thing, as a person in station Poses no threat and is only applicable to a relatively small number of NPC systems. Whether something is common or rare should not matter, as we are comparing effectiveness. What if every 0.0 system had NPC station where hostile could stay AFK docked? would that stop all carebear operations? You may argue that a docked person would not be the same threat cause you'll have buddies docked and keeping an eye on him, alerting you when he undocks. If that's the case, the same buddies could be sitting next to you in space in ECM or sensor damp ships, protecting you when AFK cloaker suddenly decloaks. Same thing. Quote: A person AFK in a POS leaves a potential avenue for recourse (Kill the POS). There is no avenue for recourse from an AFK cloaker, and they DO represents a legitimate threat to carebear as soon as they return to the keyboard. There is recourse - the AFK cloaker has to enter the system using stargates, and probably more than 1 stargate. So you can kill him before he gets to his destination. That is much easier than actually killing a POS, especially when major power blocks are involved. Anyway, I have faith that in the end, CCP will come around and nerf local. I believe that is much more likely to happen in next 2 years than any cloak changes. CCP will do it if they want to keep the game fresh and hardcore. They'll do it if they know what's good for them.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.