Exactly what mechanic does the AFK cloaker use to be effective against you? Local. How does he know you are there? Local. Remove local and very mechanic AFK cloaking relies on is removed.

Of course, that is an overly strong solution by itself. Hence another mechanic needs to replace intel.

...

Actually, I am a null miner.
My kill board is a pretty vacant area, as ore and ice do not generate kill mails.

You really should go back about 15-20 pages. I cover things like PvE income, expected risk vs. expected reward ratios, etc.

This is a game balance discussion and as has been shown local and AFK cloaking are inextricably linked. Hence the discussion of local and AFK cloaking.

And AFK cloaking nowhere fits any definition of abuse, harassment, exploits, greifing etc. That you don't like it is a completely insufficient criteria for determining if something is BadGäó.

Oh and you should also read the link where a CCP dev is in favor or turning local into a chat channel and making intel a separate mechanic.

Well, I guess I should be happy you are now considering local and AFK cloaking linked. Baby steps I guess.

It is not an easier fix.

The details of their broken components both relate to intel about the play type central to this debate. A so-called AFK cloaked ship.
In logical terms, the fact that people are told of it's presence for no effort cannot be simply pushed aside.
It is the exact reason for it's subsequent behavior, as demonstrated.

Either use logic, or admit you are abandoning it here.

If it were accurate, yes, it would be.

Problem A: Local is broken.
This has an evolved effect now called Problem B.
Problem B: Cloaking is broken

Problem B is actually more involved than this simple version. Let's expose the issue better for this context:

Problem B: Cloaking is broken by being perfectly reported in local AND by being undetectable on a level of specific location.

If you look at it logically, you have two absolute factors here, each countering the other.
You KNOW the cloaked ship is present. 100%
You CANNOT KNOW exactly where it is. 100%

Knowing the cloaked vessel is present, makes cloaking a joke.
Local Residents: Stealth who? Bob, we can all see you in chat, duh!

Being unable to subsequently find it, however, at least recovers some value for the effort being made.
Bob: Hah! Can't find me!

It reduces cloaking from a genuine stealth ability, to a utility for use in hostile areas to avoid being scanned down.

Genuine cloaking only exists in a wormhole.
The rest of EVE simply has the ability to hide, but their presence is always common knowledge.

I hope this isn't what you call logic...

Yes, that could be one response. A is broken, therefore B has to stay, which is also broken (greatly simplifying here).

The other is, B is broken and is a result of A which is also broken. If we fix A, we also fix B.

I favor the second option. However, until we we can fix A the inter-related nature of AFK cloaking and local means that if you just "fix" AFK cloaking you are providing an unearned benefit to every resident PvEing in a null system. Unearned benefits are not good game design, IMO.

You want some means to either hunt, or remove through an AFK clearance mechanic, cloaked vessels.
This diminishes the cloaked vessels.
Their behavior has been demonstrated as a response to local intel, as a countermeasure.
By reducing the effectiveness of the counter, you effectively enhance the pilots who rely on the countered effect, AKA local derived intel.
This is logic, and I welcome you to explain any objection you have to it.

Counters, eh? You are ratting in a null system. I jump in. The way local currently works is as follows, you will see me in local well before I even load grid. You will have time to get safe irrespective of anything I do, unless you are unfortunate or bad.

What is the counter to this mechanic?

Or how about this, you log in to the game and are docked in your favorite ratting system. I'm already in system looking to do BadGäó things to people in said system. But you have just logged in and with perfect certainty you know I am in system and that I am a danger to you. How do you know this? Local.

What is the counter to this mechanic?

One counter is to make local not so helpful to you...to in fact, make it your enemy. How do I do that? AFK cloaking. Or even cloaking at the keyboard just doing other stuff in game. Now I have taken local which is still providing you intel and I am using it to the detriment of your game.

By removing AFK cloaking alone you remove one of...no, the only counter to the intel provides you. Intel that is always perfect in the sense that it neve lies (i.e. it wont show me as in local when I leave, nor will it not show me when I am in system).

So don't sit there and lecture others about counters.



My God. This is just breath taking in its nonsense. When I fit a cloak to my ship, does it render your offensive modules inoperable? Once you decloak you are vulnerable to attack. Somebody linked a KM of one of my corpmates. Did you look at it? I doubt it. If you had you'd know he took two of his attackers with him. Granted, my corpmate lost more isk than he killed, but the point is sitll there. When you decloak and attack...guess what you are vulnerable to attack yourself.

Oh, and how exactly do you know, given current mechanics, you have an AFK cloaker in your system. Your semantic dance is mildly impressive, but you failed to answer the question. As did xcom, probably because he knows the answer is not going to help his argument one bit.

And lets think of it this way.

Lets suppose cloaked ships are removed from local. I show up in your preferred PvE system. You aren't there. Nobody is there. So I cloak and go to work.

How will you know I'm there?
If you don't know I'm there, that is, you think the system is empty, what will you do?

I'm guessing you'll argue something like this: I don't know who is there so I'll simply move back to high security space. Which proves my point. You currently rely on local for intel and by watering it down AFK cloaking without local is pointless as you'll go harvest resources where AFK cloaking makes no impact (high sec).

Another person may answer: Well, I wouldn't know your ship was in system so I'd undock and go about my business. Which again proves my point: AFK cloaking without local is pointless as this person would harvest resources blissfully unaware by ship was sitting at a safe cloaked.

I would argue that having cloaked ships removed from local would mean that every cloaked pilot in null would be at his keyboard. Which is completely ironic in that is what many of the anti-AFK cloak crowd claim they want, but something like this they reject out of hand. Which again strongly implies their position is based on self-interest and not game balance.

That is not an answer.

Again, given current mechanics how do you know you have an AFK cloaker in your PvE system? What exactly tells you he is present?

Stop wishing for something that does not exist, but tell us how you would know given the game as it is today.

Again, I'm not asking for his specific location in space, but how do you know he is in your system and cloaked (ignoring legacy deep safes)? What is telling you this information?

No, I am not trolling you. But I have to wonder why you wont answer.

Here, I'll help you:

You know you have a hostile cloaked in system because of.....local and either d-scan and warping around or probes.

Local is telling you there is a hostile there. You try to scan him down, but you find no trace of a ship. You conclude (and reasonably so) that he is cloaked.

Local is what causes AFK cloaking. By showing up in a cloaked ship and sitting there for hours, even days on end, I adversely impact your play. Mission accomplished...via local.

Removing AFK cloaking from the game on the other hand would make local's intel without any form of counter. It gives you a distinct advantage over hostiles entering system, and it costs you nothing.

In short, removing AFK cloaking is a buff to local and PvEing.

It is unbalanced.

Why do you insist on arguing that EVE is unbalanced?

Based on this assumption you make, why would the devs change the balance, when clearly they do not agree with your assessment?

Do you think they set it up this way, had no good reason, but wanted the very gameplay you are objecting to?

The assumption that cloaked ships are not balanced, is an opinion. There is no consensus to declare it a flaw, least of all from the devs who would be qualified to make that decision officially.
Note that I am not saying they are ideal game play. I am saying they are balanced, which in no way suggests unbroken or practical. I am saying a game aspect is matching it for it's nature in impacting the play of EVE.

OFGS....

You still can't see it?

Right now, the current counter to cloaked ships is....local. It lets you know they are there and to get safe. It tells you when they leave. With a bit of work it lets you deduce that they are cloaked.

It's not a counter Teckos it's the intel tool we have been talking about and cause the cloaked person can use the local as well it's a mutual intel tool. There is no counter to cloaking in eve at the moment. Well sorry... actualy there is. It's kinda hard to use but there is one. Fly your ship closer than 2500m of the cloaked ship and it will decloak but thats it no other counter mechanics for cloaking are available.

oh btw... post #2500 on this topic

WTFAYTA. I have said repeatedly that cloaks and local are balanced but sub-optimal--i.e. not good game design. Or to be even more explicit, there is a problem.

WTF...do I need to use small words?

Local and cloaks = bad.

Why you keep insisting I don't see a problem?

Cloaking is a problem because it is not unlocked.

Cloaked ships cannot travel undetected, every system is listing the pilot as if they were flying a parade float.
Noone is being surprised today.

On the other side, as you well know, they cannot be located more specifically than system wide either.

They either need to dumb down the game by removing it, or institute changes that result in non consensual PvP, as in unavoidable.

With changes coming out soon, it seems they are skirting around both sides, giving non cloaking ships the ability to intercept targets which not even cloaking or other regular ships can reach.

At the same time, it seems we are getting mini cyno jammers and hidden bases to work from.

Ok, I get your point, you are claiming to want active play here, and AFK Cloaking is something you see violating that.

Two considerations need to be met by your idea.

1. A method needs to exist, to give players an outlet for solo or small gang based harassment of economic targets.

2. The expected increase in mining and ratting needs to be countered, or the devs will reduce rewards to keep null sec income levels stable.

There is no reason why one idea cannot meet both points.

If income levels ARE reduced, due to the lack of obstacles, it will mean a longer grind to rat or mine simply to reach the results expected or needed. Do we want players to sink more time in exchange for less risk?

Resource denial/economics warfare is totally valid. Right now the way to go about doing that is to use AFK camping. So, if you remove that you are declaring a type of game play (resource denial/economic warfare) invalid, at least implicitly.

What will happen if AFK cloaking is dis-allowed via a change to game mechanics?

I argue the following will occur:

1. People will be able to PvE in null more than they currently do.
2. As a result income will rise.
3. Demand for goods in game will also rise (also out of game, what is the current price of a PLEX, expect that to go up, maybe even alot).
4. People will see the higher rewards-to-risk ratio and more people will end up moving to null sec.
5. The Devs seeing this increased flow of isk into the game and having an interest in the in-game economy they may very well intervene directly.

Propositions 1 & 2 are pretty banal and non-controversial to me. Where things start to get interesting is 3. Now you might think that the extra isk from ratting or whatever in Null is great, and for a time it might even be easier to get your PLEX if that is how you "pay" for your account. But as the demand increases and the price increase you'll find yourself having to rat even more....which some people might like, but in the end that **** is still called grinding and this may not be a game play enhancing result.

Proposition 4 is also intriguing to me, that it is quite possible that some of the same people complaining about AFK campers might show up here on the forums complaining about the poop-socking ratters in their ideal systems. About how they can't get a good anomaly anymore because of other people showing up. I could even see the cost of renting going up as well for you renters. After all, the additional time ratting and doing PvE could mean that any given system is no more valuable. And your corp or alliance might want even more people to try and help cover possible rental increases.

Proposition 5 also has plenty of evidence as well. Alchemy changes, particularly the ones for technetium back when it was a T2 production bottleneck is an example. The moon goo re-balancing is yet another. Nerfs to things like incursions are yet another. I'd even argue that the implementation of invention was CCP intervening in the Eve economy because they did not like what they saw. Want more examples? Drone poo removal, changing loot drops for missions, changing insurance payouts. All of these things had a direct impact on the economics of the game.

Qne speaking of economics, the eve economy is largely a closed economy. Whatever happens in 1 part will have a direct impact elsewhere in the game economy. Change the flow of isk in one part and it will, absolutely, have secondary and tertiary effects through out the rest of the economy. Moon goo, is currently a fixed quantity. There is only so much of it, and hence there is only so much T2 components that can be produced at any given time. Increase the over all level of isk in the game and those prices have to go up. Which will necessitate more grinding for isk. This will continue until there is a new equilibrium level...and all that extra isk you are making doesn't see like as much as it initially did.

And lastly, Eve is a game where players seem to take delight in causing mayhem, chaos and destruction and when it leads to another player or player(s) raging in local, or the forums, etc. That is particularly delightful. So, removing local could very well lead to more things like log on traps, AWOXing, to name two ways to keep doing what they are doing now with AFK cloaking.

It is a basic lesson of economics....everything comes with a trade off(s)....everything. What are the trade offs from getting rid of AFK cloaking by simply logging the cloaker off, or some other boneheaded solution? Its funny, you go to any discussion about the economy and when somebody says, "I mine my minerals, hence they are free..." everyone is quick to point out the opportunity cost argument. But they ignore the opportunity cost argument here. Is part of that cost increased AWOXing and a noticable jump in PLEX prices, and more people competing for more anomalies?

But risk is part of the issue. To deny this is like trying to deny that a cat is a mammal.

Why do people AFK cloak? To increase the perceived risk for PvE pilots and deny them access to resources/isk. Why do PvE pilots dislike it so? Because it increases their perception of risk.

Risk is undoubtedly an integral aspect of this discussion. To pretend otherwise is silly.

I point out, as a miner, that if we put in a solution that results in increased productivity from null, then that will create a need for the devs to counter this in order to protect eve's economy.
I am also concerned that the solution they find, could very well result in my game play as a miner becoming compromised.

I don't think this consequence is entirely obvious to most PvE players, who have possibly not considered what happens after the so-called AFK cloaker is gone for good.

... giant wall of text...

This is unbelievably dishonest horse ****. See how effortlessly and with complete contempt for honest discussion you are? No, I doubt it.

Let me explain.

Its really simple.

That guy collecting intel? Yeah...he is an active player. Not AFK.

Thus, irrelevant unless now you are talking about nerfing cloaks in general.

So stop your dissembling.

Edit:
Let me be perfectly clear here so we can stop this kind of Bravo Sierra posting:

And AFK cloaker: he collects precisely zero intel. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

Why? Because he isn't there to see what is going on.

So, by definition intel and AFK cloaking are two totally separate topics.

And driving a car blindfolded...da fuque is that about?