| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
193
   |
Posted - 2013.06.19 21:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tippia wrote:AFK cloakers are not a problem by virtue of being both AFK and cloaked. One means they can't do anything and the other means they can't do anything. Nothing squared = nothing.
Jenn aSide wrote: If you give people the ability to hunt cloakys, cloakys will be less useful in altering nullbear isk making behavior,
Tippia and Jenn aSide seem to be on the same side of this argument, but their two statements (above) are causing me some cognitive dissonance. If "cloakys can't do anything" (Tippia's statement), then how can they "alter nullbear ISK-making behavior" (Jenn aSide's statement)?
Either cloaky ships have no effects, or they have one or more effects; it can't be both.
MDD |
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
193
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 22:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kijo Rikki wrote:They can be both, because to the risk averse and those unwilling to adapt, it has an effect, but to those who are more daring or simply know how to deal with it, it has very little if any affect at all. It's all perspective, and the bottom line is an afk cloak physically has zero effect, and has the potential to have a mental effect.
You may be on to something, but the statements are still at odds: neither implied a dependency on perspective. Both were absolute statements. I'm hoping one or both of them will revise their statements. I'm also hoping to get past the absolute pronouncements in this thread (not just theirs) and into the reasoning behind them.
MDD |
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
193
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 22:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Just because you can trigger this self-defeating behaviour in others doesn't mean that the AFK cloaker is actually doing anything.
Au contraire, by definition if you can trigger the behavior then you are indeed having an effect.
MDD
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
194
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 15:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:
What I suspect is closer to an absolutely true statement is this combination of facts:
1. an AFK cloaked ship is indistinguishable from an actively piloted cloaked ship
Kijo Rikki wrote:
A) Yes he is, just use some common sense. If you are unsure, try baiting him out and pretend to rat in a pvp ship, preferably with a point to grab him when he decloaks and a cyno to bring a counter hot-drop if that is what you fear, or at least be in fleet and have your friends waiting in a safe spot to come to your aid.
In any case after a few hours odds are he's just there to disrupt operations, carry on as normal. If you're still unsure, see above.
EDIT: Corrected a fallacy in my own argument.
A nice reply (really!) but there's yet another fallacy in it that remains. Your methods of detecting an actively piloted cloaked ship require that pilot's cooperation in converting his cloaked ship into an uncloaked ship. (Detecting an uncloaked, on-grid ship is a trivial exercise.  ) I thought it obvious, but my statement is predicated on the idea that the cloaked ship's pilot is not cooperative.
So please tell me how to discriminate between an AFK cloaked ship and an actively piloted cloaked ship (prerequisite: pilot of said ship must intend to remain cloaked at all times).
For the record, I am neither a nullbear nor a cloak user; I have no dog in this fight. I'm just here to encourage the use of more accuracy and precision in the discussion.
MDD |
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
194
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 16:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kijo Rikki wrote:This is more or less the point. CCP went after afk miners because they bring raw materials into the game, which directly influences the economy. That's ok if you're doing it but without actually playing this causes inflation because its gained without any effort and sold as such.
Never, not once, has an afk cloaked ship brought materials en masse to the market causing it to crash. The worst he has ever done was strike fear into timid pilots, hurting their individual harvests.
I believe your statements above are partly false (although your intention is to be truthful); if you've got citations supporting your claims, I'd like them.
As far as I can tell, CCP has not gone after AFK miners, or AFK mission runners, or any other AFK activity. If a miner wants to start his mining laser or mining drones on an asteroid and then walk away (letting the miner laser autorepeat), then as far as I can tell CCP is happy to let them do that. Likewise, if a mission runner wishes to start dealing DPS and walk away, then again as far as I can tell, CCP doesn't object.
What CCP has gone after is some folks using automation programs which CCP believes violates the Eve Online EULA.
I don't know that it is reasonable to make any comparisons between AFK miners, AFK mission runners, and AFK cloak users. It is reasonably easy to discriminate between AFK miners and active miners. Likewise AFK mission runners and active mission runners. I know of no way to discriminate between AFK cloak users and active cloak users.
But to reiterate something I said earlier: I have no dog in this fight. I don't know that anything need change with cloak mechanics.
MDD
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
194
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 16:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:As i've said, CCP (aka them HTFU boys) should be in the habit of catering to weakness such as described above.
Missing "not" detected...
MDD  |
| |
|