| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance
MinTek Conglomerate
50
   |
Posted - 2013.01.01 10:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
I would like to put this out there in this discussion that I have arrived at the conclusion that there is no such thing in relative terms as an AFK cloaker. There is no way of knowing if anyone is behind the controls of a cloaked vessel or not so we must assume that the player is there and attentive at all times.
Now that we have removed the AFK aspect from the equation the only problem here is how do we cope with a cloaked vessel in a system?
The whole point of having a cloak on a vessel is to avoid detection so as to provide the pilot with the ability to gather intel in a hostile environment. Another option for that pilot having gathered intel is the ability to open a covert cynosural field to allow more hostile's into the system.
The only counter if you can call it that is constant vigilance from the residents of that system. You can't even use a Cynosural system Jammer as they are ineffective against Covert cynosural fields.
My solution here is to add a Covert Cynosural system Jammer that can be run instead of the Cynosural system Jammer from a POS and uses the same fuel to run. Normal cyno's can still be used.
Now at the cost of the Fuel from the jammer the residents can remove the cloaker's ability to covertly bring fleet members into the system. They can still be brought into the system via a normal cyno. This still leaves the cloakers purpose intact whilst giving at a cost to the residents the ability if vigilant to see any attack coming. |
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance
MinTek Conglomerate
51
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 16:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote: The only valid change to "AFK cloaking" must involve the reason it exists
The reason it exists is because it's a tactic with 0 risk to the cloaked person and a very real risk to the industrial inhabitants of that system. The risk being a Covert cynosural field opening and a hostile fleet entering the system with no possible means of a warning.
This risk remains the whole time the cloaked vessel remains on-line. As I stated there is no way of knowing if the person controlling the vessel is present or not so we must assume they are there.
Industrial vessels are expensive and vulnerable which makes them tempting targets and disrupting an Alliances industry can also have far reaching consequences. All done though a 0 risk activity by an alt.
|
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance
MinTek Conglomerate
52
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 19:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Kestrix wrote:The reason it exists is because it's a tactic with 0 risk to the cloaked person and a very real-ázero risk to the industrial inhabitants of that system. Fixed. No, an AFK cloaker can't do anything to you and no, there is plenty of warning when a hostile fleet enters the system. The reason AFK cloaking exists is because of local. Want to fix AFK cloaking? Fix local.
Oh right. Silly me, 0 risk to having a hostile in a system with a Covert cynosural field generator... Great lets grab the Rorquals , Orca's and Hulks and lets get some mining done! We'll all warp to that large hidden asteroid belt and sit in a large clump and get rich mining ABC's |
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance
MinTek Conglomerate
52
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 04:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Kestrix wrote:Tippia wrote:Kestrix wrote:The reason it exists is because it's a tactic with 0 risk to the cloaked person and a very real-ázero risk to the industrial inhabitants of that system. Fixed. No, an AFK cloaker can't do anything to you and no, there is plenty of warning when a hostile fleet enters the system. The reason AFK cloaking exists is because of local. Want to fix AFK cloaking? Fix local. Oh right. Silly me, 0 risk to having a hostile in a system with a Covert cynosural field generator... Great lets grab the Rorquals , Orca's and Hulks and lets get some mining done! We'll all warp to that large hidden asteroid belt and sit in a large clump and get rich mining ABC's u've never been hot dropped because of an afk player...surely he must be at his keyboard in order to light the cyno. what u want to nerf is cloaks and cynos in general. come back to hi-sec, there are no cyno's and afk cloaking is much less of an issue. Plus its where u really belong if u think about it null-bear
I've already explained in a past post that because it's impossible to know if a cloaked vessel is AFK or not we must assume that it is active all the time. In most of 0.0 a cloaked vessel is not an issue. As pointed out by various people in this thread there are tactics that can be employed to deal with them.
HOWEVER in a system raised to industry level 5, where you have players stripping the hidden belts it would be nice if we had a more pro-active method of dealing with the cloaked vessel. We have more at stake here than simply padding our pockets with ISK (although that is a very pleasant by product of what we did) When I was in 0.0 there were cloaked vessels in the system where I worked, no they did not stop me from mining and yes we did eventually deal with the issue.
I don't want to nerf cloaking I want it to remain a viable source of intel gathering/harassment. I do want a method however that lets us punish dumb/distracted cloakers who aren't paying attention, something that keeps them active or logged off. Or gives us a simple piece of intel the ship class... from that we can ascertain it's threat level.
The argument that AFK cloakers never killed anyone is not a valid one as there is no way to test the state of a cloaker at any given time. |
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance
MinTek Conglomerate
56
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
I don't want to see cloaked vessels nerfed. Leave them as they are, leave local as it is. I would be happy if CCP provided us with a device that does nothing other than detect what type of cloaking device is in effect in a system. It does not give away the cloaked vessels location or what it is, only that it's using a covert ops cloaking device or the Improved cloaking device II. It gives me an idea of what the vessel is capable of. I'd be happy with that. |
| |
|