| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 23:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
WARNING: Incoming dissertation.
For starters, I am not against cloaking. I actively employ it in w-space. Further, I don't want to ruin the lives of people in ships designed around covert ops cloaks (the only ones that, in my likely biased opinion, really matter). That being said, I do feel that with very few exceptions there is almost no risk to cloaking (short of stupidity, which is enough to capitalize on).
In trying to compare a covert ship to a submarine (modern equivalent at sea, which is where many ship classes are pulled from) or a covert agent (what people probably consider themselves in these things, I am no exception ) I feel that there is a inherent disconnect as the sub/spy can actually get caught if they are not just as cautious as their prey. While a covert ship can be caught, it's more likely that it's their lack of attention as opposed to anybody else's attentiveness.
First and foremost, I don't want to change cloaking. At all. I'm not going to suggest that they suddenly have stupid fuel requirements or need to be manually controlled. You stuck a module into a high-slot. You've already reduced your threat capabilities enough and are mostly pigeon-holed into an intelligence role, which while vastly important can still be very dull, borderline tiresome, and doesn't even come with a dry martini unless your corp is badass (and please let me know so I can drop an app).
What I would like is for the ability for ships that can just as well pigeon-hole themselves into finding those would-be covert agents that get off on lurking around without so much as the decency to request their martini be shaken, not stirred. Why do I want this? Partly because I think it would make for a much more interesting time to hunt those that lurk in the shadows. Partly because I think it would be awesome that when I'm the one doing the lurking I'm actively having to wonder whether or not my quarry is going to be able to find me or not. And partly because I think that it's about time someone did something that actually looked heart-felt when it came to anti-cloaking mechanics. Lets begin with a module:
Spatial Reconfiguration Burst I This odd piece of technology sends a ripple through the space immediately surrounding it, temporarily altering the properties of the space for a brief moment. It was originally scrapped as a failed experiment in trying to manually stimulate the conditions to produce wormholes. Although it failed in its intended purpose it gained recognition when it did manage to accidentally disrupt the cloaking capabilities of another ship conducting tests. However, the large amount of spatial energy generated by the ship leaves it unable to engage its warp drive for the remainder of its cycle. Note: This module cannot be fitted with a Cloaking Device as the potential dissonance between the two devices could be catastrophic.
This device has the fitting requirements typical to a specialized piece of equipment for a small (frigate/destroyer) vessel, requires the use of a high slot, removes the ability to cloak, leaves it vulnerable when used, and would likely require its own skill to operate. So what does it actually do for the pilot? For 1 second it creates a large mass in space. This mass is capable of being passed through (like space gas or being in a force field) and does not otherwise interfere with ships. However, cloaked ships that are in close proximity to this mass are obviously uncloaked due to how cloaks operate. The size of said mass, training time needed to learn the skill to operate it, time between cycles, etc. will be something I will leave to brighter minds, but the idea is that this is used to counter-cloak people that are on-grid and not meant to scan them down with d-scan or anything similar. It is basically an active sonar ping: it is very good at finding things but leaves the user in a vulnerable state for doing so. It's only used when you need to be safe and are willing to pay the price for being able to know what's around you.
On the topic of sonar pings, that brings me to the next part of my suggestion. People have suggested that the new destroyers have T2 versions good at hunting cloakers. I agree, though not just because they're shiny and new and don't have T2 variants. I agree because in naval history the destroyer (originally the torpedo-boat destroyer) was made in reaction to the prevalence of torpedo-boats which were small, agile ships that were made to carry torpedoes. I think it would be fitting that new destroyers are made to counteract the threat of, among other things, stealth bombers. With their myriad high-slots, frigate-like maneuverability, and own individual ways of conducting their business in the effort to fight against cloaking ships, the new T2 destroyers would have their own variant of the above module.
Spatial Reconfiguration Matrix I A specialized version of its predecessor, this device creates a large bubble that constantly reconfigures the space around it on a very small scale. Although equally as much a failure in producing wormholes, it does provide a more persistent threat to those that rely on cloaking devices within its reach. Note: This module cannot be fitted with a Cloaking Device as the potential dissonance between the two devices could be catastrophic.
It would basically be the Interdiction Sphere Launcher, minus the interdiction aspect and on a dramatically larger scale (and hopefully much less graphics intensive to spare those who don't want to be bombarded by such a large bubble of cloaking hatred attacking their retina). In addition to its ability to maintain an ongoing bubble it doesn't come with the drawback of being unable to warp since the T2 would have specialized systems for... well... not needing to hate the reason it exists.
While I may get flamed, I hope everyone at least appreciates the effort put into this idea. Cheers, fellow capsuleers. |

Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
651
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 00:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Can we get a TL:DR? And if you knew it is "Yet another anti-cloaking thread" then why did you start it rather than just put your ideas on the other thread(s) on the first page. Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1901
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 00:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Can we get a TL:DR? And if you knew it is "Yet another anti-cloaking thread" then why did you start it rather than just put your ideas on the other thread(s) on the first page.
TL; DR;...
Another bad anti-cloak idea...
The longer TL; DR is 2 ideas:
1.) An easy-to-fit highslot module that you activate to decloak all ships with some unspecified distance of you. It comes with two drawbacks: a.) It prevents your ship from using a cloak & b.) You can't warp once you activate it until it finishes its unspecified cycle. --- In short... It's a tool to allow gate campers to catch cloaky ships.
2.) A cloak disrupt probe (think dictor probe) that disables all cloaks within its radius. It comes with one drawback: You can't use a cloak... and he wants it to produce a "BIG BUBBLE". -- In short... It's a tool to allow gate campers to catch cloaky ships.
Now... to the OP... had you bothered to read any of the other billion threads on this topic, you'd realize that your idea does nothing to address the main issue that people have with cloakers, and in fact destroys the most fundamental and legitimate use of the covert cloak, thereby single-handedly nerfing covert ops, stealth bombers, force recons, transport ships, and covert T3's in the most biased, asinine method possible.
Here's the TL; DR; of my post: **** NO
|

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 00:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
I'd make a TL;DR if I could summarize everything in a sentence or less. Or if I just didn't want people to actually read it.
And I chose to make my own thread since it was an articulated idea rather than just trying to create some means of not letting people remain cloaked indefinitely while afk, which is what the other thread is about. This isn't me wanting a passive way of being able to fit my POS with a way to allow me to detect cloaky ships on d-scan because cloaking is scary OP when the name isn't one from my alliance, this is me wanting an active way of fitting a ship to be able to either detect overconfident/stupid cloaking ships at some expense to myself, willing to make sacrifices to counter a threat to operational security as it were. |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 00:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:words
Well, I have participated in a single WH camp that led to us uncloaking another ship by bumping him (again, stupidity abound being the leading cause of death in cloak-capable ships). Other than that, I didn't have any intention of this being used as a gate-camping tool whatsoever. I wouldn't even mind if it couldn't be used on-grid with a gate. It's more or less to prevent cloaking from being an infalliable get-out-of-jail-free button and a defense that ships could use (especially in w-space, which I am native to) to make sure nobody is sitting 2,501m away from you while having a lengthy chat with their fleet knowing that there is no way anybody else could possibly know they're there short of bumping into them. |

Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
651
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
So you want a module made to shy off only mining lasers and no other module, seems broken to me. Why should an AOE module disable only one type of ship, every other AOE affects all ships in the area equally. For instance ECM burst hits all ships the same, warp bubbles hit all ships (-T3 nullified) the same, smart bombs do the same base damage to all ships in there area. So I ask why should this only shut off mining lasers an not the guns on your ship and the shield transporter on your logi ship or the MWD on the interceptor or any other module that requires activation?
Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1903
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:02:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote:I'd make a TL;DR if I could summarize everything in a sentence or less. Or if I just didn't want people to actually read it.
And I chose to make my own thread since it was an articulated idea rather than just trying to create some means of not letting people remain cloaked indefinitely while afk, which is what the other thread is about. This isn't me wanting a passive way of being able to fit my POS with a way to allow me to detect cloaky ships on d-scan because cloaking is scary OP when the name isn't one from my alliance, this is me wanting an active way of fitting a ship to be able to either detect overconfident/stupid cloaking ships at some expense to myself, willing to make sacrifices to counter a threat to operational security as it were.
This forum is for the discussion and evaluation of potential game improvements.... we don't care for rhetoric ************... and that's why we want TL;DR;'s
Cloaking, in general, is very well balanced. It hides your location and makes you untargetable in exchange for severely limiting what you can do....
Using a cloak to travel safely around is the fundamental role of the covert cloak... and these tools you suggested essentially destroy that ability.
Can you please explain what's wrong with people cloaking up to get safe? You've already discovered you can uncloak a ship by flying near them... you can prevent a ship from cloaking by targetting them... and its not like they can attack you while cloaked... So, please tell me what problem, or issue, or imbalance you are trying to solve with this suggestion?
|

Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
517
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
Summary: make a highslot module that can uncloak ships on grid with the user.
Yep, you typed way too much for that one. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |

Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
651
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:So you want a module made to shy off only mining lasers and no other module, seems broken to me. Why should an AOE module disable only one type of ship, every other AOE affects all ships in the area equally. For instance ECM burst hits all ships the same, warp bubbles hit all ships (-T3 nullified) the same, smart bombs do the same base damage to all ships in there area. So I ask why should this only shut off mining lasers an not the guns on your ship and the shield transporter on your logi ship or the MWD on the interceptor or any other module that requires activation?
So I was writing this response on my I-phone and it was like "bleep, bleep, bleep" and everything was gone, and I was like "ehh", it devoured my post, then i had to write it again really fast and it wasn't as good. Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:33:00 -
[10] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:So you want a module made to shy off only mining lasers and no other module, seems broken to me. Why should an AOE module disable only one type of ship, every other AOE affects all ships in the area equally. For instance ECM burst hits all ships the same, warp bubbles hit all ships (-T3 nullified) the same, smart bombs do the same base damage to all ships in there area. So I ask why should this only shut off mining lasers an not the guns on your ship and the shield transporter on your logi ship or the MWD on the interceptor or any other module that requires activation?
When did we start talking about mining lasers? Unless that's a parallel, in which case I can definitely see the comparison. If you want to expand the role of it I am perfectly fine with doing so, making the decloaking more of a side-effect for another primary effect. My original idea was for it to bump everything, but I figured that would be tedious on development staff and settled for a concept that already exists for the most part. But you bring up an interesting point nonetheless.
Perhaps it could be used to temporarily subvert any number of "auxiliary high" modules? Remote repair, nos/neut, salvagers, other modules that I can't think of at the moment. But ultimately the idea is that it just stops them where they are currently. It doesn't prohibit them from being turned online again (once one is capable of doing so). It just interrupts the current cycle as though the player had shut it off themselves, a concept which typically doesn't work with other modules that need to run through their entire cycle (you can't really turn off any of the others mid-cycle since their effect is all loaded into the moment their cycle occurs). Maybe if it stopped all of said modules from being used again for a short duration? 5s (on par with the normal recharge for cloaks)? 10s to make it seem actually worthwhile?
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:This forum is for the discussion and evaluation of potential game improvements.... we don't care for rhetoric ************... and that's why we want TL;DR;'s
Cloaking, in general, is very well balanced. It hides your location and makes you untargetable in exchange for severely limiting what you can do....
Using a cloak to travel safely around is the fundamental role of the covert cloak... and these tools you suggested essentially destroy that ability.
Can you please explain what's wrong with people cloaking up to get safe? You've already discovered you can uncloak a ship by flying near them... you can prevent a ship from cloaking by targetting them... and its not like they can attack you while cloaked... So, please tell me what problem, or issue, or imbalance you are trying to solve with this suggestion?
Cloaking is well-balanced, to that I will not disagree. As I said in the OP, I was never trying to hurt cloaking the way it stands now. If the reason you use cloaking is to traverse dangerous space then you should be fine (unless you are in a non-covops ship trying to elude a dedicated gate camp, which is where I guess the previous comments came from). If you are trying to create redundant safety measures by using this at a safe spot to make sure you don't get probed down while you're probing a system then you should be fine.
This is not made to counter the luxuries commonly associated with cloaking. This is made to deter people from lurking over prey, waiting for the moment their fleet arrives to strike. This is made to stop people from being able to use ECM then cloak up once your target lock is no longer established. For ships capable of fitting a covops cloak this is likely one of the few ways the ship could even be targeted to begin with (making the daring assumption the pilot is competent). The idea is that the people that this will actually affect are those that aren't using the cloak to play safe, they're using it to play predator or hit-and-run. It reveals them for a moment (or until they leave the field for the T2 Destroyer version), but from then on they know that they are no longer in full control of their situation. |

DataRunner Attor
Independent Confederacy of Worlds
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
Yet again nerf cloak thread,
Yet again you fail to realize the true problem, what you are trying to do is nerf a counter to a perfect intel tool. Cloaking was design around escaping local chat so if you want to come up with ideas on you first are going to have to come up with ideas on how to remove local in a sensible manner. Before you can counter a counter, you must first eliminate what the counter was design to counter. (try saying that five times fast, I dare you.) |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 01:54:00 -
[12] - Quote
DataRunner Attor wrote:Yet again nerf cloak thread,
Yet again you fail to realize the true problem, what you are trying to do is nerf a counter to a perfect intel tool. Cloaking was design around escaping local chat so if you want to come up with ideas on you first are going to have to come up with ideas on how to remove local in a sensible manner. Before you can counter a counter, you must first eliminate what the counter was design to counter. (try saying that five times fast, I dare you.)
Unfortunately, I mostly fly in w-space, so that scenario already exists. And I would have absolutely no problem with cloaking ships getting the ability to "hop off" of local chat when their cloaks are running. The only thing I really wonder about there is how it would handle local's numbers. Would it still show that 10 people are in local when 2/10 of them are cloaked or would it show 8? I think there could be something to be said about not knowing who's out there ;p
And I tried to say it five times fast and was doing good, but stumbled at eliminate when I hit the fourth time. It turned into something like "elimunu-fack". |

DataRunner Attor
Independent Confederacy of Worlds
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 02:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote:DataRunner Attor wrote:Yet again nerf cloak thread,
Yet again you fail to realize the true problem, what you are trying to do is nerf a counter to a perfect intel tool. Cloaking was design around escaping local chat so if you want to come up with ideas on you first are going to have to come up with ideas on how to remove local in a sensible manner. Before you can counter a counter, you must first eliminate what the counter was design to counter. (try saying that five times fast, I dare you.) Unfortunately, I mostly fly in w-space, so that scenario already exists. And I would have absolutely no problem with cloaking ships getting the ability to "hop off" of local chat when their cloaks are running. The only thing I really wonder about there is how it would handle local's numbers. Would it still show that 10 people are in local when 2/10 of them are cloaked or would it show 8? I think there could be something to be said about not knowing who's out there ;p And I tried to say it five times fast and was doing good, but stumbled at eliminate when I hit the fourth time. It turned into something like "elimunu-fack".
Just because you live in a WH doesn't mean there is not a problem with local mate, saying it like that is saying.
"I fly use to fly a titan way back when and never got killed by the AoE doomsday....So I don't see why everyone else was so hype up about it." |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 02:17:00 -
[14] - Quote
No, I wasn't trying to be callous. Just that it's hard to imagine a problem that you don't really contend with. That being said, I am definitely open to concurrent suggestions that would allow those wanting to fly covert ships the ability to do so... well... covertly. I think that it is more than a fair trade. |

Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
654
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 02:23:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ok so you want this to counter cloaks in worm holes, but the ripples will stretch out all the way to empire space destroying cloaking there. Right now as has been said dozens upon dozens of times the only counter to local is cloaking, to make a module that counters cloaking. Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |

Banana1x
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 02:55:00 -
[16] - Quote
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Make everywhere work just like WH space with delayed local; we shouldn't be using a chat channel as a source of intel. Combat scanning probes should show up cloakers. A proximity EMP module should knock out all cloaks within a certain radius (I think grid is OP, but certainly about 20k). This module should have drawbacks to prevent overuse.
Ultimately cloakers need to keep moving. |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 03:05:00 -
[17] - Quote
@Omnathious Deninard I don't see how being able to counteract something destroys it. Are tank fits destroyed by the existence of guns, and if so why have tanked fits not gone away? Have target jammers destroyed the existence of non-drone combat, and if so why aren't Gallente Ships the sole form of combat? Again, this is a high slot module (i.e. takes away from your ability to shoot dudes) that knocks a target out of cloak (does not stop them from recloaking as soon as their module allows it) and costs them their warp drive (meaning the user is in a more vulnerable state than the cloaked ship is more often than not).
@Banana1x I honestly wouldn't mind that. Local is and has been little more than a drain on resources. If people want to chat openly with other pilots in the system then by all means they should be able to, but to force everyone's identity to be openly available information just for being in the same system is kinda annoying. It is a great security blanket for many, though. And I can attest to how annoying it can be to spam d-scan, the only notable alternative. Although it would teach newer players about d-scan really quickly... |

Banana1x
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 03:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
In my experience, as soon as we get your name in local we're checking the age of your character, googling you, your corp, what sort of ships you fly, who you fly with, what ships they fly, are you likely to be bait. We can get all that intel as soon as you come into system and I hate that.
It's a little too easy to assess a threat. You can sit nice and cosy, docked up and gather intel on people coming through without actually having eyes on the gates.
WH's are great, intel requires work. The only thing broken right now is cloakers. I'd like them to get rid of that D-scan button and make a system that auto refreshed every 10-30 seconds (spamming scan is not good gameplay). And show up cloakers in combat scanners.
|

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1904
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 03:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote: This is not made to counter the luxuries commonly associated with cloaking. This is made to deter people from lurking over prey, waiting for the moment their fleet arrives to strike. This is made to stop people from being able to use ECM then cloak up once your target lock is no longer established. For ships capable of fitting a covops cloak this is likely one of the few ways the ship could even be targeted to begin with (making the daring assumption the pilot is competent). The idea is that the people that this will actually affect are those that aren't using the cloak to play safe, they're using it to play predator or hit-and-run. It reveals them for a moment (or until they leave the field for the T2 Destroyer version), but from then on they know that they are no longer in full control of their situation.
A.) Why do you want to stop people from "lurking over their prey"?? Why is hit-n-run an issue? Hit-n-run tactics are one of the few means of assymetric warfare available in this game, and I really so no reason to inhibit it!!!
B.) If you create a tool to decloak ships on grid with you... People will employ it at a gate to decloak people trying to travel through it... This is a very obvious use of the mechanic, and you have to be blind not to see it. |

Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1215
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 05:18:00 -
[20] - Quote
To the OP I have one fundamental flaw with the logic behind your idea. So you want a way to hunt croaky ships. Your analogy is sub hunters correct?
The basic flaw with this analogy is that submarines have teeth. A sub has a whole array of weapons that it can use while submerged (aka cloaked).
So you want a ship that can hunt me down? Fine. I get to have my stealth bomber fire torpedoes ( even works with the analogy) while remaining cloaked.
|

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 06:21:00 -
[21] - Quote
@Gizznitt Malikite
A.) A person that lurks over their prey just waiting for a small gang to come clear them up leaves the person that is killed no chance to retaliate or even know how to handle the threat short of "don't play Eve." And hit-and-run tactics exist well outside of cloaking so much so that those that want to prevent hit-and-run need a module to do it, it's just that with cloaking there is no way to hit them back once they run unless they want to hit you again.
B.) The first time you brought this up I also said it could be restricted to needing to be used away from gates. You could even in-game-logic it and say that gates/wormholes interfere with them due to some quantum flux problems that overheat the unobtainium alloys they employ. The idea is that this is not meant to punish players that just want to stroll through space with an extra bit of security. But now I'm just repeating myself.
@Derath Ellecon
Submarines do have teeth, but using them gives away their position (via MASINT, when all else fails). That's the cloaking equivalent of dropping stealth. I don't recommend you get into a pissing match about how ships work with a guy that's in the Navy. |

Roime
Shiva Furnace
2230
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 06:31:00 -
[22] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote: The idea is that this is not meant to punish players that just want to stroll through space with an extra bit of security. But now I'm just repeating myself.
Yet it will do exactly that, there would no way to use cloak to get away from gate or hole camps any more.
Furthermore, suggestions should contain some kind of argument why things need to be changed.
Purpose of a cloaking device is to make your ship undetectable. Why do you want to break the module by removing it's purpose?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2090
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 07:18:00 -
[23] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote:A.) A person that lurks over their prey just waiting for a small gang to come clear them up leaves the person that is killed no chance to retaliate or even know how to handle the threat short of "don't play Eve." Two things:
1. Once a cloaking ship decloaks, it can be locked up and killed just like any other ship... except unlike combat capable ships it has a targeting delay (5 to 7 seconds minimum) and/or has low tanking ability (a tanky combat capable Stealth Bomber (the only ship that can target right after decloaking) has an average of 3 to 5k EHP). Not only that... a solo cloaky ship is usually not well endowed in the DPS department. This allows you to... a. perform a knee-jerk warp off (if you were aligned). b. target first and alpha strike and/or ECM jam the cloaky ship (requires a sensor boosted artillery fit ship or Griffin). c. take them out yourself (provided you are fit to deal with such). d. turn off any Ewar you are using and let the NPCs kill the cloaky instead.
2. There is always a way to counter a threat... but sometimes that counter is more reactionary and preventative more than "proactive" (as I pointed out in the above point).
Nexas Alduin wrote:And hit-and-run tactics exist well outside of cloaking so much so that those that want to prevent hit-and-run need a module to do it, it's just that with cloaking there is no way to hit them back once they run unless they want to hit you again. See above.
Also... you are confusing who is doing the "hitting and running." It's the cloaky ships. That's what they are designed to do. At the cost of the ability to hold their own in a direct confrontation (weaker tank, decloaking delay, and/or poor DPS).
Nexas Alduin wrote:B.) The first time you brought this up I also said it could be restricted to needing to be used away from gates. You could even in-game-logic it and say that gates/wormholes interfere with them due to some quantum flux problems that overheat the unobtainium alloys they employ. The idea is that this is not meant to punish players that just want to stroll through space with an extra bit of security. But now I'm just repeating myself. Then it would be useless in most other capacities as you still can't probe down people sitting cloaked and afk in a safespot... and for those situations where it won't be useless it arbitrarily nerfs some ships while not affecting others.
Example: a cloaky Proteus or Pilgrim will not be able to approach and "sneak up" people within the decloaking bubble... but Stealth Bombers, Arazus, Rapiers, and Tengus can as they can easily engage 30 to 40+ km away. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |

Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
65
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 07:24:00 -
[24] - Quote
Roime wrote:.... Furthermore, suggestions should contain some kind of argument why things need to be changed. ....
Because people want to hunt down cloaked ships and current game mechanics do not hold any modules, ways, ships or anything to find cloaked ships from the void of space. |

TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 08:23:00 -
[25] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:Roime wrote:.... Furthermore, suggestions should contain some kind of argument why things need to be changed. .... Because people want to hunt down cloaked ships and current game mechanics do not hold any modules, ways, ships or anything to find cloaked ships from the void of space.
Which is exactly the point of a cloak ... |

Nexas Alduin
TriFlexure Void-Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 08:47:00 -
[26] - Quote
Roime wrote:Purpose of a cloaking device is to make your ship undetectable. Why do you want to break the module by removing it's purpose?
TheSkeptic wrote:Which is exactly the point of a cloak
The point of a weapon is to deal damage. Do you disagree with the existence of tanking modules, some of which outright remove the damage you dealt? The point of a propulsion module is to go faster. Do you disagree with the existence of a stasis webifier? The point of a warp scrambler/disruptor is to prevent people from warping. Do you disagree with the existence of warp stabilizers? Virtually every shipboard module that creates an advantage has an opposing module made to deny that advantage.
ShahFluffers wrote:There is always a way to counter a threat... but sometimes that counter is more reactionary and preventative more than "proactive"
There are only two things that you can't really proactively fight and can only react against: cancer and aging. Those also sound like things that could be used to describe virtually infallible cloaking mechanics.
ShahFluffers wrote:Also... you are confusing who is doing the "hitting and running." It's the cloaky ships.
No, I wasn't. I was pointing out that their hit-and-run tactics involved 'hit and then become impervious to retaliation' mechanics. The tactic, applied virtually anywhere else, can involve a chase. But once that cloak gets established there is nothing one can do to press the fight anymore short of getting a really lucky bump in. Hit-and-run tactics in other cases can actually involve a person having to run from something (warp disruptor range) and should they escape their enemy can actually chase them (warp to their new location).
ShahFluffers wrote:Then it would be useless in most other capacities as you still can't probe down people sitting cloaked and afk in a safespot... and for those situations where it won't be useless it arbitrarily nerfs some ships while not affecting others.
I think you confuse me for people that are scared of people sitting in their null system afk-cloaked for days on end... Anyways, many modules do that already. Tanking modules; they'll either be doing absolutely nothing for you (you're not taking damage) or they'll only be a nerf to some ships (those dealing damage) while others aren't affected (every non-combat ship in Eve). Put more simply, your tank is only bothering people trying to kill you while it bothers nobody else. This module pretty much only bothers the people trying to kill me (and either needing a team to do so or trying to use this as their defense mechanism) and it doesn't bother anybody else. |

Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
66
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 08:50:00 -
[27] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:Roime wrote:.... Furthermore, suggestions should contain some kind of argument why things need to be changed. .... Because people want to hunt down cloaked ships and current game mechanics do not hold any modules, ways, ships or anything to find cloaked ships from the void of space. Which is exactly the point of a cloak
And thats why people whine about it and thats why there should be something that allows people to find them. |

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1072
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 08:55:00 -
[28] - Quote
You sure did spend a lot of words to propose a terribly unbalanced, unnecessary mechanic, OP. |

TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
141
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 09:16:00 -
[29] - Quote
Nexas Alduin wrote:Roime wrote:Purpose of a cloaking device is to make your ship undetectable. Why do you want to break the module by removing it's purpose? TheSkeptic wrote:Which is exactly the point of a cloak The point of a weapon is to deal damage. Do you disagree with the existence of tanking modules, some of which outright remove the damage you dealt? The point of a propulsion module is to go faster. Do you disagree with the existence of a stasis webifier? The point of a warp scrambler/disruptor is to prevent people from warping. Do you disagree with the existence of warp stabilizers? Virtually every shipboard module that creates an advantage has an opposing module made to deny that advantage.
Your perspectives are way off to the point I question your intelligence.
The weapon deals damage, no tanking mod takes that away. If you are talking about reps, they're just repairing the ship, not taking damage away. The guns still do the same damage.
Everything has an opposing module? really? What module denies a passive targeter or ship scanner? what module denies plates or extenders? what module denies a salvager? what module denies a tractor beam? what module denies a strip miner? what module denies cargohold expanders?
Edit: in before some attention starved muppet says ECM.
You are comparing aggressive combat modules with a passive non aggressive module.
Please post more about how terrible you are....
...then biomass.
Azrael Dinn wrote:And thats why people whine about it and thats why there should be something that allows people to find them.
No they shouldn't.... the cloaked ship can't hurt you, it can't even target you. ... |

Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
14478
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 09:33:00 -
[30] - Quote
You should have named it. "Yet another pointless nerf, just because."
Cloaks are balanced. Malcanis for CSM 8. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |