Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rex Driller
Legion of Niflheim
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 08:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
Sjugar wrote:All the willy nilly here.
AFK cloakers are not a problem because they're AFK.
The problem is that it's a schroedingers cloaker, the cloaky may or may not be AFK you never know, but if you don't act like he is behind his keyboard (even if het might well be AFK going to the pub, having a good time with his girlfriend or just sleeping) you ARE going to lose your ship sooner rather then later.
And there's the imbalance, when I play eve, I'm behind my keyboard. The cloaker might as well not be behind the keyboard 90% of the time, I still have to act as if he is active, because I never know when he IS going to be active.
So, even when not behind the keyboard the cloaker is effecting my gameplay directly. I don't mind cloakers effecting my gameplay but please let them be behind the keyboard when they effect my gameplay, just like me when I'm playing.
Then we have balance.
Support said they also have concerns about this issue, but they dont do anything :) GM's advice was post on forum to get enough sample from playerbase.
A possible solution: cloak needs a charge, what is behave like laser crystals. With a 0.1% damagy/cycle 5 sec cycle time cloaker have 5000 secs, almost one and a half hour in cloak. Thats enough time for a hunt or an OP, and active player can reload the module. But when goes AFK, after limited time other players has a chance to get revenge :D
|
Kai Pirinha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 10:08:00 -
[32] - Quote
Sjugar wrote:All the willy nilly here.
AFK cloakers are not a problem because they're AFK.
The problem is that it's a schroedingers cloaker, the cloaky may or may not be AFK you never know, but if you don't act like he is behind his keyboard (even if het might well be AFK going to the pub, having a good time with his girlfriend or just sleeping) you ARE going to lose your ship sooner rather then later.
And there's the imbalance, when I play eve, I'm behind my keyboard. The cloaker might as well not be behind the keyboard 90% of the time, I still have to act as if he is active, because I never know when he IS going to be active.
So, even when not behind the keyboard the cloaker is effecting my gameplay directly. I don't mind cloakers effecting my gameplay but please let them be behind the keyboard when they effect my gameplay, just like me when I'm playing.
Then we have balance.
Well well, if cloaked up people in systems are affecting you're game play, then I have a solution for you! Go into Highsec. Then there can be hundreds or thousands of people cloaked up next to you and it won't affect you one bit.
There you have your balance. Congratulations. It didn't cost the devs one line of work. :)
If you cannot take the heat of nullsec - move out! It is called Nullsec for a reason, that means null security - there is no safety! Do you think the name is a coincidence? Or did the devs maybe assign this name for a reason? I wonder what it might be... |
Mike Azariah
Gallente Benevolence Association
358
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
dark heartt wrote:dark heartt wrote:Can someone please explain to me how an AFK Cloaker *actually* affects you? I realise that you may not want to take the risk and perform activities in system when they are there, but surely you could move to a system nearby? I'm still waiting...
not a direct answer but a counter question. If we deal in risk and reward can you tell me the cloakers risk in return for the reward of intelligence on the opponents systems and threat pressure on any ops in the system?
m Mike Azariah-á CSM8 |
Laura Dexx
Fractional Warfare
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:52:00 -
[34] - Quote
What's the risk of running a locator agent? What's the risk of looking at your star map? What's the risk of having an awoxing alt or spy to score kills? Should there be any risk for basic intel? |
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Anomalous Existence Disavowed.
121
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 00:12:00 -
[35] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:...
Even better: What if the cloaky wants to engage / hotdrop? If someone is ratting in a system looked at by an AFK cloaker, why wouldn't the cloaker think it's a trap? Maybe it's bait? Or neut fit? That's no risk? Because nullbears are dumb. ;)
I would like to see more cloakdroppers get nailed by such bait. :D |
Sayf ulMulk
Royal Starlancers
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 18:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
Well removing local will not happen as ccp just boosted the fuction of local as radar on test server with faster scrolling bind to keys instead of mouse sooo any discussion about that is pretty much over.
However every mechanics needs a balance and cloaking has no counter balance. So either it should be nerfed or changed in different direction. It has nothink to do with living in 0.0. I remember same attitude back in the day from people who used nano battleships. If it works but doesnt have counter balance it doesnt mean its right. |
Svarii
Acclimatization
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 19:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
AFK Master Here.
If I want to run my game 23.5/7 so I can sit down and play when I walk past my comp without having to load it up everytime, why should that not be allowed? I browse the internet and check my email in game, I also leave for hours at a time while looking at my spaceship from the other room. If I chose to waste my money by doing nothing at all, I doubt that is hurting the servers, it's probably helping them actually. They still get my money and I'm sure the 'load' on the server is nill compared to me flying around.
Anyways, if you don't like them, just camp out and wait for their return to the keyboard. Or scan down those 'cloaky AFK' people, bumb their ship, and open fire.
BTW: I never heard of an undamaged Kleong Battlecruiser or Romulan Warbird having a problem keeping their cloak online. (No SciFi issue here)
I don't see a problem. (Jita is a special case, and I'm sure CCP does their best there.) |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1332
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 10:19:00 -
[38] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Do you girls honestly believe that removal of local is the end-all of solutions?
I'm by no means asking for local in null to be changed/removed to match wormhole space, merely pointing out that the current mechanics are the root cause behind both "AFK Cloaking" and hot dropping.
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Comparisons with worm space fail because 'normal' conditions are so different from K-space; probes are permanently in space, access can be controlled 99% and any potential threat can be neutralized using what amounts to generic fits. Security in worm space is a non-issue if you are sufficiently organized, the only threat comes from running into someone who has even better organization and/or will as the guys who went in and logged off until enough force was in system to do the job .. there is NO comparison to ordinary null space.
So let me get this straight, the "conditions are so different" because wormhole players...
- actively keep their eyes open (via probes and dscan), rather than being lazy and relying on a mechanic that can be devalued / spoofed via afking
- have fits that are more appropriate for the situations (i.e. not minmaxed PVE fits)
- are "sufficiently organized"
Sounds to me like wormhole players have the right idea then. They know they're not in a little happy safe farm zone. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1332
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 10:21:00 -
[39] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:dark heartt wrote:dark heartt wrote:Can someone please explain to me how an AFK Cloaker *actually* affects you? I realise that you may not want to take the risk and perform activities in system when they are there, but surely you could move to a system nearby? I'm still waiting... not a direct answer but a counter question. If we deal in risk and reward can you tell me the cloakers risk in return for the reward of intelligence on the opponents systems and threat pressure on any ops in the system? m
Whats the risk in looking at the local list to determine who is in system and how many friends they have |
Kai Pirinha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 08:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Veshta Yoshida wrote:Do you girls honestly believe that removal of local is the end-all of solutions? I'm by no means asking for local in null to be changed/removed to match wormhole space, merely pointing out that the current mechanics are the root cause behind both "AFK Cloaking" and hot dropping. How about (read it to the end first) removing local and replacing it by constellation chat? You still have your intel and that somebody is in your constellation, but you won't see how many and who is in your current system. So your intel channel become more valuable too, because you can keep an eye at gates and report the guy/fleet.
TheGunslinger42 wrote:So let me get this straight, the "conditions are so different" because wormhole players...
- actively keep their eyes open (via probes and dscan), rather than being lazy and relying on a mechanic that can be devalued / spoofed via afking
- have fits that are more appropriate for the situations (i.e. not minmaxed PVE fits)
- are "sufficiently organized"
Sounds to me like wormhole players have the right idea then. They know they're not in a little happy safe farm zone. This! |
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
14845
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 08:48:00 -
[41] - Quote
Kai Pirinha wrote:How about (read it to the end first) removing local and replacing it by constellation chat? You still have your intel and that somebody is in your constellation, but you won't see how many and who is in your current system. So your intel channel become more valuable too, because you can keep an eye at gates and report the guy/fleet. I have seen this suggested many times. It is a somewhat elegant and easy solution to introduce.
My only concerns are that I do feel we have a balance atm. Even if this balance is made through two imperfect mechanics off setting each other, but balanced it is. Would the change from local to constellation, tip the balance in favour of those cloaked? If this is so, then would we see an introduction of a cloak hunting system? Then placing the balance firmly in the other direction?
I know I may be over analysing it, but I do see a snowball effect in the offing.
Still, it is a nice simply change that could be made.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Kai Pirinha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
34
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 10:43:00 -
[42] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Kai Pirinha wrote:How about (read it to the end first) removing local and replacing it by constellation chat? You still have your intel and that somebody is in your constellation, but you won't see how many and who is in your current system. So your intel channel become more valuable too, because you can keep an eye at gates and report the guy/fleet. I have seen this suggested many times. It is a somewhat elegant and easy solution to introduce. My only concerns are that I do feel we have a balance atm. Even if this balance is made through two imperfect mechanics off setting each other, but balanced it is. Would the change from local to constellation, tip the balance in favour of those cloaked? If this is so, then would we see an introduction of a cloak hunting system? Then placing the balance firmly in the other direction? I know I may be over analysing it, but I do see a snowball effect in the offing. Still, it is a nice simply change that could be made. Another aspect: BlackOps and Covert Cynos would become much more fun and become a lot more attractive. You wouldn't know in which system they jumped into (unless you tracked the covert ship through all gates and pinned it down to a specific system) and whom they will attack. |
Mike Azariah
Gallente Benevolence Association
366
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 14:11:00 -
[43] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote: Whats the risk in looking at the local list to determine who is in system and how many friends they have
I think the difference is that local is a two way street. You see me, I see you. If we are both paying attention then any risk is equal.
Cloaky: What chance/module/skill does the target (say a miner) have to defend himself aside from scooting to a POS or station? What risk does the afk cloaker take in a safe spot as he leaves for work for the day?
m Mike Azariah-á CSM8 |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1335
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 10:05:00 -
[44] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote: Whats the risk in looking at the local list to determine who is in system and how many friends they have
I think the difference is that local is a two way street. You see me, I see you. If we are both paying attention then any risk is equal. Cloaky: What chance/module/skill does the target (say a miner) have to defend himself aside from scooting to a POS or station? What risk does the afk cloaker take in a safe spot as he leaves for work for the day? m
The target has the built in mechanics of cloaked players not physically being able to do anything to them while cloaked on their side. They also have the fact that cloaky ships generally have weak tanks and or meager dps.
There may not be much (or any) risk for someone sitting afk cloaked - but there's no risk for someone sitting in a pos or outpost either. And like someone AFKing in a pos/outpost, there's no reward.
|
Gorvan
Barbarian Armory
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 10:33:00 -
[45] - Quote
AFK is fine, Cloaking is fine, but don't make them invulnerable. Give me some way to find and kill them at some point.
Lets make Eve a bit more real. You could hide in my home. I may notice you broke in or hear you moving about. Chances are very high that eventually I will find you. You will have time to do dirty deeds until then, but when found, I could turn the tables.
Special probles, or ship fittings, or even a time activated system wide scanner. I'll let someone smarter than me figure that out.
At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker. |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
127
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 11:09:00 -
[46] - Quote
This isn't aimed at the OP as that focused on actual inactivity from the player bringing up a prompt of if you are AFK (which I guess is a reasonable thing). I'm asking this more toward the general dislike of and demand for ways to counter cloaking (I didn't want to start another AFK cloak thread either, people would hate me).
How do you know they are a cloaked AFK player? Is it that they don't reply in local or remain in system for hours and you can't scan them down?
Because I fit into that catergory as an explorer. I fly a cloakable ship, turn local blink off as I'm exploring solo, and spent most of my time using the scanning system. But I can't fit a cyno and my usual explorer fit has little to no offensive and defencive capabilities. I don't like the idea that while I'm focus on scanning down a site and sitting in a safe spot cloaked that someone can still find me and kill me went I've taken the steps to not being found.
Also, though I'm not sure it will still work after Odyssey, can't a Covert-Ops frigate still avoid you uncloaked at a safe-spot using the ECCM method to counter probes? I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Kai Pirinha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
36
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 11:11:00 -
[47] - Quote
Gorvan wrote:Lets make Eve a bit more real. You could hide in my home. I may notice you broke in or hear you moving about.. Let's make the comparison a bit more real: Instead of somebody in your home, you just have surveillance equipment in your home, watching your every move. I sincerely doubt you will ever notice that it is there. And you won't find everything. In Nullsec at least you know somebody is there and watching you. ;) |
Gorvan
Barbarian Armory
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 11:27:00 -
[48] - Quote
Kai Pirinha wrote:Gorvan wrote:Lets make Eve a bit more real. You could hide in my home. I may notice you broke in or hear you moving about.. Let's make the comparison a bit more real: Instead of somebody in your home, you just have surveillance equipment in your home, watching your every move. I sincerely doubt you will ever notice that it is there. And you won't find everything. In Nullsec at least you know somebody is there and watching you. ;)
You make a good point. In order to watch every move you would need a lot of camaras, and a respectable amount of time to install them. As a person very familiar with this type of activity, its not easily done in great numbers undetected. Therefore, setting up many cameras in someone elses home for evil intentions is rare, and not everyone can do it. In Eve no skill is required to cloak up and hide. Even camaras can be found in time, In Eve a cloaky cant. There needs to be a chance to counter it, even if its slight. Let people cloak and camp, its all good, but don't make it risk free. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1342
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 15:08:00 -
[49] - Quote
Gorvan wrote:At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker.
Why
|
Gorvan
Barbarian Armory
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 06:58:00 -
[50] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Gorvan wrote:At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker. Why
I dunno, why is there any risk in 0.0? Nullsec is all about risk vs reward. Why should it be risky to mine there? Why should it be risky to gate camp there? Why should it be risky to rat there? Why own 0.0 space? Why doesn't everyone go there? Why make it so you can get huge rewards with no risk? Risk has a role in most parts of the game, which for many makes it exciting. If you or your Alliance earned the station in the system for safety that's one thing, someone at some point risked something to get it, but getting free intel for no real risk or effort by cloak/camping should be changed. |
|
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1344
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 07:52:00 -
[51] - Quote
Gorvan wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Gorvan wrote:At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker. Why I dunno, why is there any risk in 0.0? Nullsec is all about risk vs reward. Why should it be risky to mine there? Why should it be risky to gate camp there? Why should it be risky to rat there? Why own 0.0 space? Why doesn't everyone go there? Why make it so you can get huge rewards with no risk? Risk has a role in most parts of the game, which for many makes it exciting. If you or your Alliance earned the station in the system for safety that's one thing, someone at some point risked something to get it, but getting free intel for no real risk or effort by cloak/camping should be changed. A mining bot has a risk of being ganked in High-Sec while hes afk. Shouldn't a system camper in Null?
Edit: woops wrong thread, correct reply to follow...
There is risk in cloaking. You must travel into enemy space. Cloaky ships are fragile and lack firepower. You are not capable of doing much by yourself other than gathering intel.
Additionally, there is zero effort or risk in using local as an intel tool, there is zero risk sitting in a pos or outpost.
Why do you demand such one sided increases in risk, which are disproportionate to the 'reward' |
Gorvan
Barbarian Armory
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 12:44:00 -
[52] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Gorvan wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Gorvan wrote:At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker. Why I dunno, why is there any risk in 0.0? Nullsec is all about risk vs reward. Why should it be risky to mine there? Why should it be risky to gate camp there? Why should it be risky to rat there? Why own 0.0 space? Why doesn't everyone go there? Why make it so you can get huge rewards with no risk? Risk has a role in most parts of the game, which for many makes it exciting. If you or your Alliance earned the station in the system for safety that's one thing, someone at some point risked something to get it, but getting free intel for no real risk or effort by cloak/camping should be changed. A mining bot has a risk of being ganked in High-Sec while hes afk. Shouldn't a system camper in Null? Edit: woops wrong thread, correct reply to follow... There is risk in cloaking. You must travel into enemy space. Cloaky ships are fragile and lack firepower. You are not capable of doing much by yourself other than gathering intel. Additionally, there is zero effort or risk in using local as an intel tool, there is zero risk sitting in a pos or outpost. Why do you demand such one sided increases in risk, which are disproportionate to the 'reward'
I don't see how most players in Nullsec are good with a ship that cant be found or killed yet can do so much damage. Almost everyone travels into enemy space at some point, so that's not unusual risk for 0.0 . It doesn't make it better if you can be one shotted by a miners drones if you cant be locked or found. All Im saying in adding risk is make them findable at least over time.
|
Kai Pirinha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
36
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 12:54:00 -
[53] - Quote
Gorvan wrote:I dunno, why is there any risk in 0.0? Nullsec is all about risk vs reward. Why should it be risky to mine there? Why should it be risky to gate camp there? Why should it be risky to rat there? Why own 0.0 space? Why doesn't everyone go there? Why make it so you can get huge rewards with no risk? Risk has a role in most parts of the game, which for many makes it exciting. But aren't the cloaky ships bringing (at least part of) the risk to nullsec too? If you make it smaller, that would make the risks smaller too. So by your logic, reducing the cloaky abilities/capabilities/possibilities should reduce (all!) the rewards in Nullsec too in order to keep the balance :) I like that! At least that would be the next logical step. |
Rex Driller
Legion of Niflheim
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 17:09:00 -
[54] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Gorvan wrote:At its current state, we need more risk for the system cloaker. Why
http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/regarding-afk-complex-farming-1
" We do not find this to be acceptable gameplay."
And AFK carebear farming?? |
Gorvan
Barbarian Armory
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 05:02:00 -
[55] - Quote
It is what it is, Invulnerability to gain rewards. AFKing for rewards and effect is frowned upon in every other aspect of the game. Twist it, mold it, and paint it however you want, it seems simple to me. Let them be found if they stay too long. Add another item to the game to do it, helps the eve economy and adds a cool new aspect of pvp to the game. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1346
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 09:19:00 -
[56] - Quote
Gorvan wrote:It is what it is, Invulnerability to gain rewards. AFKing for rewards and effect is frowned upon in every other aspect of the game. Twist it, mold it, and paint it however you want, it seems simple to me. Let them be found if they stay too long. Add another item to the game to do it, helps the eve economy and adds a cool new aspect of pvp to the game.
Ok I have several issues with this, firstly: There is no reward. They gain absolutely nothing. They cannot prevent other players doing something, they don't gain any isk or assets, the reward is ZERO. If you decide to interfere with yourself then that is on you. If you consider that a "reward" to the cloaker/afker then... don't give them that reward. Simple.
Secondly, I don't even see the point of the use of the term "AFK" in these topics. To highlight what I mean, let me present two situations.
The classic "Afk cloaker": Sits in a safespot, cloaked, ship is completely stationary Player goes to walk the dog, have dinner, work, whatever
The active cloaker: Sits in a safespot, cloaked, ship is completely stationary Player sits at the computer the entire time, chatting in corp, etc chat channels.
To everyone in the system, these two players are exactly the same. They're not scanning or hunting, they're not even moving, they can't be found, etc. The fact people keep harping on about "AFK" would suggest that they do no wish to impede or punish the second - very much active - type of player. Except every single suggestion ever proposed WOULD punish the second type of player, despite the fact that he's active (just not visibly so to the carebears).
This suggests to me that people are not in fact attempting to deal with an issue regarding "AFK" players, because they ALWAYS suggest things that would hurt the second type of player too
So can we stop with the dishonesty? This isn't about afk players, this is about ACTIVE players that you want defending from |
Kalos Beila
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 10:49:00 -
[57] - Quote
Most of the suggestions favorable to this idea of increasing cloaker risk simply push likely combat areas away from gates and stations (if you assume that unknown situation = pilot avoidance) by making these choke points a weaker choice for campers, cloaked or not.
Even with the "constellation-only local" you're going to have the same issues as you do now - you don't know whats behind that gate or outside the station. The only way to save yourself is with logic, experience and a decent fitting. If this is what you hope to avoid then the issue for you is gameplay itself.
This all just boils down to someone being upset that they aren't good enough to avoid easy camping tactics which just equals poor ability. Why should EVE reward people for being horrible at it? Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting one in a fruit salad. |
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
597
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 12:17:00 -
[58] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
This suggests to me that people are not in fact attempting to deal with an issue regarding "AFK" players, because they ALWAYS suggest things that would hurt the second type of player too
So can we stop with the dishonesty? This isn't about afk players, this is about ACTIVE players that you want defending from
Well said Gunslinger. These threads always seem to be thinly veiled attempts at nerfing ALL cloakers, using the 'afk people are bad m'kay' excuse.
For all the talk of generating 'risk', it all boils down to making nulsec even safer so the zerobears can rat/mine/whatever under the complete safety of Local's all seeing eye.
Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. |
Spathe Ne Boirelle
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 17:53:00 -
[59] - Quote
I also wonder why therers no limitation to the cloaking modules as you can run it forever but I do support this. Seems to make sense to me. |
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Anomalous Existence Disavowed.
121
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 23:25:00 -
[60] - Quote
Gunslinger actually failed to mention the third type of 'passive' cloaker: cloaky eyes/ears in W-space. Sometimes one has to sit cloaked off a wormhole or starbase for hours to set up a trap, act as a picket for incoming hostiles, or because the inhabitants of your static are trying to bore you to death with their POSspinning. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |