Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Doobie Man
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 07:06:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Doobie Man on 18/05/2011 07:06:51 A term that gets thrown around Australia a lot (Far too often for that matter) is "Un-Australian". This refers to people / people's actions as being against the expected values or traditions of common Australians.
Thought I'd list a couple of things that I think should seem to go against the common expectations of the pod pilots and possibly even Devs of EvE Online.
1) Freighters / JFs having no slots: The complete lack of options when it comes to this ship type seems to go against the general rule of being able to customise a ship to do what you want it to do. Please note, I am NOT advocating leaving their stats the same and adding slots (As in I am not advocating a "Buff" per se). Still, It would be nice to be able to take all the expanders off (Majorly nerfing cargo) to change it out for Nano's / Inertial stabs etc, or even hardeners / damage controls etc for expensive cargo...
2) Afk Cloakers: This, at least in my opinion, seems to go against the actual game design philosophy of EvE Online. A player being able to influence / disrupt the activities of other players while actually not playing the game (Away from Keyboard for long periods)seems to fly in the face of logic, when CCP has spent so much effort over the years promoting active multi-player team activity as the way to achieve things in eve (Or for that matter, solo activity (Activity being the key word here)). I personally believe that something more in-tune with the expectations of the general population of eve is that cloaked ships should be scannable. I'm talking a difficulty equivalent of scanning down a 10/10 plex, but still - scannable. This would mean that an active player cloaked who moves - almost at all, would be borderline impossible to scan out, but an afk player would be found given enough time because they are not really moving.
Anyway, food for thought - This thread is a kind of Semi Constructive whine thread - I'd like to know what others think!
|
captain foivos
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 07:08:00 -
[2]
Hotdropping titans on subcaps:
-- Need a break from EVE? |
Opertone
Caldari World - of - Empire Cassiopeia.
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 07:13:00 -
[3]
slots of frighters? why not...
afk cloakers... not big deal - this is the way to infiltrate enemy territory, which should be by all means.
What should not be - you seeing the enemy in local, because then you realize the threat the very moment they appear in your system. Instant alertness is not what enemy wants.
|
Doobie Man
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 07:14:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Doobie Man on 18/05/2011 07:16:22
Originally by: captain foivos Hotdropping titans on subcaps:
Well - while this might annoy people, I don't know that it fits into the same category, mainly because this is an activity that requires action from players, and also has potential consequences (Titan is stuck on field for a while afterwards I believe). Actually, making cloaked ships scannable would increase the risk for the titan pilot if he didn't have the support to be in system without huge risk. He'd have to decloak and change positions once in a while or he'd be found out if his foe were determined enough.
|
Doobie Man
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 07:18:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Opertone slots of frighters? why not...
afk cloakers... not big deal - this is the way to infiltrate enemy territory, which should be by all means.
What should not be - you seeing the enemy in local, because then you realize the threat the very moment they appear in your system. Instant alertness is not what enemy wants.
I do think afk cloakers are a big deal, they are influencing the game without playing the game. The other point about seeing reds / neuts in local is a discussion that has been going on for a long time, I haven't decided whether I like the idea or not - Probably depends largely on what other options you would have to survey your surroundings.
|
Doobie Man
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 08:00:00 -
[6]
Anyway - Back on topic - Any more thoughts / opinions / additions?
|
baltec1
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 08:05:00 -
[7]
AFK cloaking is perfectly in line with eve as it generates lots of salty tears. Also don't be Un-Australian and eat more lamb.
|
Aiwha
Caldari 101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 08:12:00 -
[8]
Originally by: captain foivos Hotdropping titans on subcaps:
That's like a gift from god. Its those damn Super Carriers hot dropping that's annoying. I can't heal stupid
|
Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 10:26:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Doobie Man I do think afk cloakers are a big deal, they are influencing the game without playing the game.
This is bull****. How do you know they are not there?
Anyone who complains about AFK cloaking is an idiot because you don't know if they are at their keyboard or not! You're just whining for the sake of it!
- If they are at their keyboard, your agument is meaningless!
- If they are not at their keyboard, you are safe!
Either way, your argument is pointless. Just get over your paranoia!
Also, if you don't want covert-ops ships in your system, defend your borders better!
|
Goldman Suchs
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 12:12:00 -
[10]
AFK cloakers are only a problem if you are in a lame alliance where you can't count on your buddies to back you up when you're attacked.
Form a ratting fleet. Get on comms. Stick together and help each other when the cloaker uncloaks.
There is always a counter in Eve.
|
|
Hakkar'al Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 12:22:00 -
[11]
While afk cloakers aren't really a problem (form a fleet, move to the next system) I still think it would be neat to have a new slow probe that can find cloakers. Would require highest skills and be slow enough that standard use of cloaky ships (fly through, cloaked recon while still active) will not be affected.
|
Eyup Mi'duck
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 12:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Kale Kold
Originally by: Doobie Man I do think afk cloakers are a big deal, they are influencing the game without playing the game.
This is bull****. How do you know they are not there?
Anyone who complains about AFK cloaking is an idiot because you don't know if they are at their keyboard or not! You're just whining for the sake of it!
- If they are at their keyboard, your agument is meaningless!
- If they are not at their keyboard, you are safe!
Either way, your argument is pointless. Just get over your paranoia!
Also, if you don't want covert-ops ships in your system, defend your borders better!
THIS. Nothing more, nothing less.
Get over it! Learn from your mistake and move on. |
The Old Chap
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 12:27:00 -
[13]
Aussie tears, how delicious!
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 12:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Kale Kold
Originally by: Doobie Man I do think afk cloakers are a big deal, they are influencing the game without playing the game.
This is bull****. How do you know they are not there?
Anyone who complains about AFK cloaking is an idiot because you don't know if they are at their keyboard or not! You're just whining for the sake of it!
- If they are at their keyboard, your agument is meaningless!
- If they are not at their keyboard, you are safe!
Either way, your argument is pointless. Just get over your paranoia!
Also, if you don't want covert-ops ships in your system, defend your borders better!
let me clarify the complaint a bit for you: they don't like people who are cloaked in their system 23/7, occasionally and randomly attacking. some amount of common sense indicates that since people aren't awake 23/7 that at least some amount (likely most) of the time this guy is AFK. but since (like you said) they can't know when they are and are not AFK they need to act as if they are always active. thus, the cloaked ship is having an impact whether at the keyboard or not. to be simple and concise, people refer to them as "AFK cloakers" on the presumption that people understand the above concept rather than thinking they are afraid players who aren't actually playing.... i can't imagine anyone actually thinking that.
so, in the future, when someone says AFK cloaky, please think of it in these terms and form an appropriate response.
thank you.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 13:12:00 -
[15]
"AFK cloakers" act as a disruptive influence on the free intel that local provides and as such they are not in any way a problem ù they are a solution and should not be touched until and unless the original problem (local) has received some other fix. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Ana Vyr
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 14:53:00 -
[16]
What cracks me up about AFK cloakers is the folks who cry about them are the same folks telling everyone that the "M" in MMO means teamwork. It's funny when it all falls apart because someone might have to guard some miners.
|
Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 19:47:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Kale Kold on 18/05/2011 19:53:19
Originally by: Arnakoz let me clarify the complaint a bit for you: they don't like people who are cloaked in their system 23/7 at war with them, occasionally and randomly attacking. some amount of common sense indicates that since people aren't awake 23/7 that at least some amount (likely most) of the time this guy is AFK. but since (like you said) they can't know when they are and are not AFK they need to act as if they are always active. thus, the cloaked war target's ship is having an impact whether at the keyboard or not. to be simple and concise, people refer to them as "AFK cloakers" griefers on the presumption that people understand the above concept rather than thinking they are afraid players who aren't actually playing.... i can't imagine anyone actually thinking that.
There i fixed that for you to illustrate why you are wrong!
Originally by: Arnakoz let me clarify the complaint a bit for you: they don't like people who are cloaked in their system 23/7 competing on the market, occasionally and randomly attacking winning auctions or buy orders. some amount of common sense indicates that since people aren't awake 23/7 that at least some amount (likely most) of the time this guy is AFK. but since (like you said) they can't know when they are and are not AFK they need to act as if they are always active. thus, the cloaked ship competing buyer or seller is having an impact whether at the keyboard or not. to be simple and concise, people refer to them as "AFK cloakers" competition on the presumption that people understand the above concept rather than thinking they are afraid players who aren't actually playing.... i can't imagine anyone actually thinking that.
There, i fixed it again to further show why your point is invalid.
Originally by: Arnakoz let me clarify the complaint a bit for you: they don't like people who are cloaked in their system 23/7 lowsec pirates, occasionally and randomly attacking. some amount of common sense indicates that since people aren't awake 23/7 that at least some amount (likely most) of the time this guy is AFK. but since (like you said) they can't know when they are and are not AFK they need to act as if they are always active. thus, the cloaked ship lowsec pirate is having an impact whether at the keyboard or not. to be simple and concise, people refer to them as "AFK cloakers" griefers on the presumption that people understand the above concept rather than thinking they are afraid players who aren't actually playing.... i can't imagine anyone actually thinking that.
...and again! ouch!
Shall i keep going? Or maybe you just accept EVE and man up?
|
daddys helper
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 20:02:00 -
[18]
there is no rule against being AFK there never will be a rule against being AFK
Why? because there's nothing wrong with being AFK
if there was, we could expect to see an idle timer that would kick ANYONE who is idle for x minutes. Manufacturing keystrokes to defeat idle detect would be macroing and thusly against the eula.
so since its pretty easy for CCP to deal with afk players we must assume that they have NO ISSUE with AFK players, otherwise 50% of the server pop would get DC'd every 15 minutes while spinning in station.
or is your problem not actually about people being AFK, but with people being afk in space in your carebear utopia?
yeah, see it doesn't work like that, nerfs are in theory about balance, not your personal peace of mind
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 00:49:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Arnakoz on 19/05/2011 00:50:53
Originally by: Kale Kold *snip( Shall i keep going? Or maybe you just accept EVE and man up?
the fact that EVERYTHING that you tried using as an example requires people to be ACTUALLY PLAYING EVE (and not currently at work or bonking the neighbor) proves my point.
i'm perfectly fine with ACTIVE cloakers in system gathering intel, causing chaos or hotdropping me. i've been on both sides of that fence a number of times.
the point is... the fact you needn't do anything other than log in and cloak up is simply too easy. its winning without even trying. and it doesn't even require skill or knowledge of the game.
lets say you have a 2 week old PL character in your system. he types into local: "hi, i'm going AFK for anywhere between 2minutes and 14hours" "i may or may not need to get to work now. " "but since i'll be AFK, i obviously can't hurt you." [...] "you should go ahead and bring those ratting supercaps out" "besides, i probably don't have a cyno anyways..." "anyways...... have fun while i'm gone! :) "
should you bring out that supercap of yours, and earn 150M+/hr, or rat in a gang of BC's earning ~1/8'th of that. if the former, please tell us where you like to rat :) if the latter, that guy who probably isn't even aware of what you're doing is costing you a large amount of ISK (like a BS an hour), without even doing anything.
tell me that isn't overpowered.
|
daddys helper
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 01:00:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Arnakoz Edited by: Arnakoz on 19/05/2011 00:50:53
Originally by: Kale Kold *snip( Shall i keep going? Or maybe you just accept EVE and man up?
the fact that EVERYTHING that you tried using as an example requires people to be ACTUALLY PLAYING EVE (and not currently at work or bonking the neighbor) proves my point.
i'm perfectly fine with ACTIVE cloakers in system gathering intel, causing chaos or hotdropping me. i've been on both sides of that fence a number of times.
the point is... the fact you needn't do anything other than log in and cloak up is simply too easy. its winning without even trying. and it doesn't even require skill or knowledge of the game.
lets say you have a 2 week old PL character in your system. he types into local: "hi, i'm going AFK for anywhere between 2minutes and 14hours" "i may or may not need to get to work now. " "but since i'll be AFK, i obviously can't hurt you." [...] "you should go ahead and bring those ratting supercaps out" "besides, i probably don't have a cyno anyways..." "anyways...... have fun while i'm gone! :) "
should you bring out that supercap of yours, and earn 150M+/hr, or rat in a gang of BC's earning ~1/8'th of that. if the former, please tell us where you like to rat :) if the latter, that guy who probably isn't even aware of what you're doing is costing you a large amount of ISK (like a BS an hour), without even doing anything.
tell me that isn't overpowered.
3 things come to mind...
first, you can't ban some AFKers without banning ALL AFKers secondly, for psychological warfare to be effective you only require a perceived threat and a gullible victim. thirdly, how can you even call AFK lurking overpowered in a game that lets you skill up without even playing?
geeze, if people like you guys had your way CCP would be providing us with our own private instances so we can play single player eve the way it was meant to be played....
|
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 01:16:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Arnakoz on 19/05/2011 01:18:56
Originally by: daddys helper
3 things come to mind...
first, you can't ban some AFKers without banning ALL AFKers secondly, for psychological warfare to be effective you only require a perceived threat and a gullible victim. thirdly, how can you even call AFK lurking overpowered in a game that lets you skill up without even playing?
geeze, if people like you guys had your way CCP would be providing us with our own private instances so we can play single player eve the way it was meant to be played....
who said anything about banning them? the solutions that i've seen are: -fuel for cloaks -completely removing local (i don't think this will work personally) -making local something that is upgraded and paid for by the alliance (delay based) -ability to scan ships that haven't moved or otherwise shown signs of activity for a long period of time (my idea. though, since "signs of activity" are easily produced via macro... it needs some work) -specific ships meant to hunt cloaky's (i don't care for this one either. i like cloaks exactly how they are - for active play. lets not ruin that)
i'm sure there are others. those are just the ones i see as having merit.
more than anything i can't help but get annoyed by the logic that "if a dog is sleeping he can't bite you" that i see all over the place... if it weren't for that i probably wouldn't have replied.
edit: and if they think that they're perfectly safe around that dog and can do whatever as if he wasn't there, they're the ones being gullible.
and as for skilling - it isn't costing someone(s) 100M+/hr. (if you don't follow, read my example again...)
|
Grumpymunky
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 02:02:00 -
[22]
I spent an entire week cloaked in a high-sec mission hub and not one person complained. Maybe that's where you should be.
|
daddys helper
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 03:00:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Arnakoz Edited by: Arnakoz on 19/05/2011 01:18:56
Originally by: daddys helper
3 things come to mind...
first, you can't ban some AFKers without banning ALL AFKers secondly, for psychological warfare to be effective you only require a perceived threat and a gullible victim. thirdly, how can you even call AFK lurking overpowered in a game that lets you skill up without even playing?
geeze, if people like you guys had your way CCP would be providing us with our own private instances so we can play single player eve the way it was meant to be played....
who said anything about banning them? the solutions that i've seen are: -fuel for cloaks -completely removing local (i don't think this will work personally) -making local something that is upgraded and paid for by the alliance (delay based) -ability to scan ships that haven't moved or otherwise shown signs of activity for a long period of time (my idea. though, since "signs of activity" are easily produced via macro... it needs some work) -specific ships meant to hunt cloaky's (i don't care for this one either. i like cloaks exactly how they are - for active play. lets not ruin that)
i'm sure there are others. those are just the ones i see as having merit.
more than anything i can't help but get annoyed by the logic that "if a dog is sleeping he can't bite you" that i see all over the place... if it weren't for that i probably wouldn't have replied.
edit: and if they think that they're perfectly safe around that dog and can do whatever as if he wasn't there, they're the ones being gullible.
and as for skilling - it isn't costing someone(s) 100M+/hr. (if you don't follow, read my example again...)
lol so its all mostly self serving to a handfull of PvR players (player v roids) and depriving someone of 100M+/hr is a damn fine and totaly legitimate tactic and helps the market from going even further into hyper inflation by keeping high value empire mega-mining operatations out of null.
these are checks and balances, theres not always a supercap fleet ready to hotdrop your 1 man orca/hulk fleet, so the afk SB works wonders, hell it could be an afk ibis for all you know
and again I say it don't matter because you can't (I said ban, but I meant it as restrict) restrict some afk people and not others, say you are working in a system with a station, you gonna say that people sitting in station 23/7 should be kicked because you have to check dscan every now and then?
I expect the tears to increase as null wakes up again and starts to do something about the carebear fungus that has sprouted in all the little dead end systems and closed loops.
make your time
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 03:23:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Arnakoz on 19/05/2011 03:23:51
Originally by: daddys helper
you really didn't read my post did you. i didn't mention mining at all. miners see a minor loss, since they earn crap regardless. i'm talking supercaps. and while i agree with you (somewhat) on the hyper inflation part, that fact remains that causing that amount of loss shouldn't be so easy.
if you are active in system with a cloak, then by all means you deserve it. and if you can stay active 23hours a day for a week straight... then more power to you. but the fact that you can't stay active for that amount of time, yet still cuase the same amount of chaos just isn't right.
i've been the AFK cloaker. i would log in before work. maybe get on my machine via remote desktop a couple times during the day to say hi in local; just to keep them on their toes. occasionally i would drop a cyno or attack one of them, just so they knew i was actually a threat that they needed to ALWAYS be wary of. and i couldn't help but think "this shouldn't be this easy." nothing in eve should be that easy. these were very skilled pilots i was messing with (enemies of the NC living in NC space, to give a hint) and in that line of thought, IMO people who whine about not nerf'ing the AFK-abilities of cloaky ships are the ones looking for the easy button - not those who see a problem with it.
|
Hakkar'al Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 07:15:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Hakkar''al Gallente on 19/05/2011 07:15:26 lol - it's a lost cause Arn. This is another area where you will run at high speed into the wall of nay-sayers.
AFK cloaking isn't really a problem (I've done countless anoms with afk cloakies in system), but suggesting some new ways of counter it will always bring out the knee-jerk naysayers/flamers.
|
AngelFood
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 07:27:00 -
[26]
ridiculous .. i'm sure if you were a goon though ccp would make the changes instantly, .. regardless if you had abused game mechanics and rl people for most of your play time.
|
Coresino
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 19:46:00 -
[27]
I attack AFK Cloakers with Vegemite jars.
|
Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 22:27:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Arnakoz i'm perfectly fine with ACTIVE cloakers war targets in system gathering intel hunting us, causing chaos or hotdropping looking for me. i've been on both sides of that fence a number of times.
the point is... the fact you needn't do anything other than log in and cloak up dock up is simply too easy. its winning without even trying. and it doesn't even require skill or knowledge of the game.
There i fixed that for you to illustrate why you are wrong!
Originally by: Arnakoz i'm perfectly fine with ACTIVE cloakers traders in system gathering intel buying and selling, causing chaos or hotdropping outbidding me. i've been on both sides of that fence a number of times.
the point is... the fact you needn't do anything other than log in and cloak up place a buy order or contract is simply too easy. its winning without even trying. and it doesn't even require skill or knowledge of the game.
There, i fixed it again to further show why your point is invalid.
Originally by: Arnakoz i'm perfectly fine with ACTIVE cloakers lowsec pirates in system gathering intel griefing, causing chaos or hotdropping hunting me. i've been on both sides of that fence a number of times.
the point is... the fact you needn't do anything other than log in and cloak up dock up is simply too easy. its winning without even trying. and it doesn't even require skill or knowledge of the game.
...and again! ouch!
Shall i keep going? Or maybe you just accept EVE and man up?
----
The main flaw of your argument is that you don't like people who are not online or at their keyboards interfering with your game.
GUESS WHAT, ALL PEOPLE INTERFER WITH YOUR GAME (AND EVERYBODY'S ELSE'S GAME) WHEN THEY ARE OFFLINE OR AFK, ITS CALLED A PERSISTENT SHARED WORLD!
----
|
Doobie Man
|
Posted - 2011.05.20 00:20:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Doobie Man on 20/05/2011 00:22:10 Kale you've offered nothing to this thread other than to act like your way is best, and anyone who argues against that point must me stupid (which is a common argument from stupid people - funnily enough). The guy you're bagging has done a very good job of rebutting your argument, you're just a) Too thick, b) too ignorant to see it (I'd bet on both)
Regardless of whatever spin you try to put on it, some players do spend a significant portion of their time, whether on their main or an alt, cloaked in an enemy system and completely afk for long periods of time, purely to disrupt their enemies. They are having an impact, they are achieving something important while completely away from the game (Manliness has nothing to do with it ).
I've heard suggestions of afk time outs as a solution. I don't agree on this point because I think that such a timer also goes against the established and accepted norms of eve...
In a nut shell - I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM with Afk Cloakers. What I have a problem with is that there is NO COUNTER to this strategy. Give us the ability to scan them down! Implement it in such a way that makes an afk cloaker hard to scan down, and a non-afk cloaker damned hard to scan down (Nigh impossible). I'd like to see a nerf to afk cloaking... A nerf to all cloaking - Not so much...
|
Zagdul
Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2011.05.20 00:59:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Kale Kold
Originally by: Doobie Man I do think afk cloakers are a big deal, they are influencing the game without playing the game.
This is bull****. How do you know they are not there?
Anyone who complains about AFK cloaking is an idiot because you don't know if they are at their keyboard or not! You're just whining for
Because they're AFK.
AFK = not at keyboard.
= not there.
He has a problem with people who AFK cloak in systems.
He never mentioned that he had a problem with someone at their computer camping a system cloaked.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |