EVE Search - A legitimate Discussion and Ideas on Cloaking

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

A legitimate Discussion and Ideas on Cloaking

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:29:00 - [1] - Quote caps are necessary simply to insure that the message is read NOW BEFORE YOU RESPOND USING YOUR TRIUNE BRAIN FUNCTIONS (google and you will understand) I WOULD ENCOURAGE GENUINE PARTICIPATION RATHER THAN THE TYPICAL HATE COMMENT THAT CONTRIBUTES NOTHING OTHER THAN YOUR BAD ATTITUDE OR DISDAIN. AND IF YOU COULD MANAGE TO PRESENT A LEGIT ARGUMENT THAT WOULD ALSO BE APPRECIATED AS WOULD READING THE ENTIRE POST BEFORE RESPONDING. if you cant manage to do that dont bother cuz you're wasting electrons at that point. wooo now with that out of the way. you can probably assume where this is going based off the title and prologue. There is a clear (uh oh dare i say it) imbalance with cloaking. Cloaking is a very valid game mechanic and i find its existence in the game desired. However my main problem is how cloaking mechanics work rather than its existence. references/discussion topics: AFK Camping, local intel, counters/balancing. concern#1 : it is near impossible to locate and dispose of a cloaker giving them near invulnerability. true you cant do a lot of things but you can not be located and still do plenty to do some damage. maybe not immediate put it has an impact nonetheless or there wouldn't be so many posts about it. Granted you should be able to cloak to scout out enemy systems and bookmark things relatively undetected but even stealth bomber (irl) can only fly so long and even they can be detected with enough effort (science would suggest that things that do exist are detectable at some level). meanwhile cloaking renders a pilot completely untraceable except for the fact that you can see in local that they are indeed in system. Local is indeed a form of intel however as to its supposed "OverPowered" presence as little evidence as it only gives the names of people in system and NOTHING MORE. Cloaking at its current state is being abused and has gone untouched by CCP FOR YEARS. AFK Cloaking is claimed (by those whom clearly do little else) to be a "nonissue" because of the "obvious" fact that afk cloakers can't harm you because they are AFK. the Lack of involvement from CCP on the issue shows that EVE is leaning more and more to the pvp side of things (which i know big surprise for me to actually play a game for other advertised elements) 1) I cant tell if you are afk or not and therefor have to assume the worst at all times or i am an idiot and thus have to hide 2) when hiding i cant make any isk and thus causes economic harm (and if the market can be considered a form of "pvp" this is equally legitimate) some even ask for ransom but as you pay one off another is soon to appear, go figure. 3) I cannot detect a cloaked pilots whereabouts AT ALL. which is completely unrealistic and extremely overpowered due to the fact i cant harm you if i don't know where you are, and the previous explanations already given. so enough squabbling over how it is a flawed mechanic. time for some ideas on how to combat the issue while maintaining cloaking existence and usefulness (other than the use of pinning down defenceless corps for literally months and draining them financially). #1 Pos decloak modules: an expensive hard to train for module that sends a pulse that renders all ships unblockable for 5-15 min which can either be activated once every hour manually or just do this pulse on a regular hourly interval (CCP can figure out the details) #2 Cloak probes: simple a ship is fitted with probes that detect cloaked ships and upon such and warp to and target the ship. accessibility details also up to ccp #3 the dreaded cloaking Fuel: as previously stated real stealth bombers cant fly for ever and this would be an easy way of limiting cloak ability but still allowing cloaks and could even present a new market in terms of fuel and where it is derived. my preferred twist on it is that the fuel is used as ammo for cloaking modules and thus has a time limit based on the type of fuel and the module but also has a reload time that can limit the reliability (assuming you cant reload while cloaked) #4 AFK Timers: this would be something along the lines of every 30-60 minutes an inactive player is kicked from the game which both reduces lag but also helps counter afk cloaking (which for those dedicated cloakers who know how to read timers would simply make it a little more impractical) I believe a healthy combination of these things would insure that cloaking mechanics/cov ops/black ops would be maintained but also make sure that other game mechanics are not only added but preserved and not dominated by the aggressive PVPer who's upset because his space just got taken over (BooHoo ; __ ; Pasta)
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:32:00 - [2] - Quote And yet, you fail to address what cloaking is design to counter. If you want A legitimate Discussion and Ideas on Cloaking, then one must look at all sides of the argument. Why yes, I'm talking about the broken system that gives free Intel, we call it local.
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:38:00 - [3] - Quote "meanwhile cloaking renders a pilot completely untraceable except for the fact that you can see in local that they are indeed in system. Local is indeed a form of intel however as to its supposed "OverPowered" presence as little evidence as it only gives the nmes of people in system and NOTHING MORE. " Lol. your a cloaky who likes to troll cloak posts, ive seen you in about every post and you have failed to contribute legitimate contributions. If i wanted local to be gone id live in a WH and maybe you should if you dont like it.
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 388	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:38:00 - [4] - Quote I understand your desire for a good cloaking conversation, however, it is highly unlikely that you'll get one. Also highly unlikely that this thread won't be locked. It's become a taboo topic really.
Bane Nucleus Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate 1365	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:43:00 - [5] - Quote If I have missed this point in your OP, please let me know. Your ideas would more or less kill wormhole space in it's current iteration. Cloaking is arguably the single most important game mechanic for us. To do what you have proposed would ruin an entirely unique part of Eve. No trolling please
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:47:00 - [6] - Quote Its sad becuase CCP wont and havent done anything for years and are tired of people wanting a rebalance. Bane: please be more specific as to how it hurts WH space. you have my attention. although my suggestions are only ideas and im sure others can come up with better ideas
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:49:00 - [7] - Quote Literally everything you say can be applied to docked players too. CCP, nerf AFK docking. (They also wreck literally every other use for cloaks, but that's obvious.)
Bane Nucleus Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate 1365	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:52:00 - [8] - Quote Since we have no local, we have to rely on cloaked ships for intel. Also. there are no stations, so we have to warp to POS's to see what ships are manned/unmanned. Sometimes, we have to sit on those POS's for an extended period of time. This is the same for sitting on wormholes. In conclusion, we love the current iteration of cloaking. We consider ourselves as being watched 24/7, and it never prevents us from making isk. No trolling please
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:53:00 - [9] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: "meanwhile cloaking renders a pilot completely untraceable except for the fact that you can see in local that they are indeed in system. Local is indeed a form of intel however as to its supposed "OverPowered" presence as little evidence as it only gives the nmes of people in system and NOTHING MORE. " Lol. your a cloaky who likes to troll cloak posts, ive seen you in about every post and you have failed to contribute legitimate contributions. If i wanted local to be gone id live in a WH and maybe you should if you dont like it. I fail to contribute legitimate contributions, yet provide reasons why cloaking is balanced, I have yet to EVER see anyone counter my reasons, not once, AND I have yet to see a single cloak thread recently that HASN'T been locked. So, how about this, please stop beating a dead horse.
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 22:59:00 - [10] - Quote Danika: what inteded other uses? id apreciate specifics and yes you could apply it to docking except for the inherent perversion. Docking is a legitimate and realistic mechanic if you want to come get me while im docked then bring your fleet and take out the station (it is possible you know) rather than camp my *** all day Bane: my ideas dont ruin WH in the sense that you think it does it merely limits cloaking so it is not abused. WH is still Viable. Dragoon: please stop confusing your opinion with logical reasoning it would be a benefit to us all including yourself. perhaps there is a reason why there are so many cloak posts and i presented plenty of reasons. I on the contrary am wating for you to present something I already havent read from you (because clearly i care so much about that)
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:05:00 - [11] - Quote What other uses? Try the following. Bombers Scouting Wormhole Shenanigans Gatecamps Running said gatecamps Hiding Blockade runners in general Recons in general Covert t3s in general Any form of black ops gang doing anything at all, ever Seigefleet (that is, structure grinding in bombers) Cynos Bait Dictors Exploration If you can find the ships, as in your pos module and cloak probes ideas, then the cloaky ship with it's already tremendous disadvantages compared with it's non cloaky bretheren, are worthless. Cloak fulel prevents any kind of prolonged deployment, adds another hoop that wormhole people have to jump through and does a number on all of the above forms of play. And taking a station requires a week, and still does not allow me to get you. In any way. And hell, your AFK timer breaks hauling, market alts, fleets, mining and ratting as well as everything above. Why should the entirety of the rest of the game suffer because you are afraid of a person who is not even at their keyboard?
Bane Nucleus Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate 1365	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:06:00 - [12] - Quote No one in wormhole space ever feels that cloaking is abused....EVER. Also, lots of cloakies die in wormhole. They aren't the invulnerable ships people make them out to be. With no local, we have no idea they are even there until they decloak. Then we kill them. It's not a broken mechanic at all. No cynos, no fixed "gates", limited mass on wormholes, etc...All of those things limit the force projection in wormhole space, which is the real problem you are talking about. In null sec, people claim that a cloaky can stop an entire system from doing sites, mining, and other various pve activities. Is that because of the cloak or because existing null sec mechanics allow it? (cynos, no mass limited entrances into system, etc..) Those issues simply don't exist for us in wormhole space and we have the same cloaking mechanic that you do. No trolling please
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:09:00 - [13] - Quote Bane Nucleus wrote: No one in wormhole space ever feels that cloaking is abused....EVER. Also, lots of cloakies die in wormhole. They aren't the invulnerable ships people make them out to be. With no local, we have no idea they are even there until they decloak. Then we kill them. It's not a broken mechanic at all. No cynos, no fixed "gates", limited mass on wormholes, etc...All of those things limit the force projection in wormhole space, which is the real problem you are talking about. In null sec, people claim that a cloaky can stop an entire system from doing sites, mining, and other various pve activities. Is that because of the cloak or because existing null sec mechanics allow it? (cynos, no mass limited entrances into system, etc..) Those issues simply don't exist for us in wormhole space and we have the same cloaking mechanic that you do. neither, it's because they're pants wettingly terrified of one guy who isn't even at the computer. That's the only reason for these threads. Fear of the unknown.
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 2123	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:12:00 - [14] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: There is a clear (uh oh dare i say it) imbalance with cloaking. Failed before you began. Saying it is so does not make it true. And your 'arguments" that follow in no way give any compelling evidence to defend your claim.
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:15:00 - [15] - Quote I will now explain something. I will be blunt, but careful with your fragile understanding of cloaking. A: Cloaking is not a risk free adventure. Cloaking is infact the reward for the risk you took getting into position, and being smart about one's positioning. The amount of risk one incurs flying a heavily nerf ship, that can hardly provide any combat abilities outside of it designated target. Example, Stealth bombers are design to hit slow moving targets/large fleets, they are not design to combat ships of it own size, or any kind of quick moving, small signature ship, like a frigate. B: Cloaking outside of those covert ops ships, heavily nerfs one's targetting system, as soon as you decloak, you are now a sitting duck for a good full ten server cycles. Which for those that don't know. That is 10 seconds. This allows the defender to respond first, unless said defender is AFK. C: Cloakers are highly valueable assets, which are easy to destroy. People say oh cov-ops can warp while cloaked! Constantly, they forget things that can not only force a cloaker to decloak, but the amount of stuff they CAN'T do while cloak. One of them is to activate a Cyno. As soon as someone uncloaks, that should be your cue to warp out and away, of course there are a few other things one can do. One of them is a counter hot-drop. Nothing will ruin a hot dropper's day, then finding their easy kill... Not so easy to kill. Infact, destroying just one hot-drop fleet... nine times out of ten, will stop future hot-drops from happening. My final point I will now provide: Cloak is broken, I don't to contest that, however. Local is broken as well, thus Local and cloak, both being broken by nature, balances eachother. I know it a hard concept to understand and all, but if one studied, and used cloak. Actually set up a cloak operation will fully understand what that saying means.
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:16:00 - [16] - Quote Before this gets locked because i know it will and i realise this will most likely have litte effect id like CCP to note that the same people post on these cloaking posts and turn them into flame wars which in turn gets them locked which would appear to me as an atempt to limit ideas presented in the forum to manipulate the likelyhood of continuation of the imbalance, because they enjoy the current abuse of the mechanic. Bane: while i like the fact that WH is fun for some people i and many other players would prefer not to have to be forced to do it in order to avoid broken mechanics. what you presented was how WH space is less voulerable to cloaks not how it ruins WH space. Derath: you fail to give any real evidence for leaving it the way it is. i feel confident in the evidence i have presented.Thank you so much for your contribution. anything else?
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:19:00 - [17] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: Before this gets locked because i know it will and i realise this will most likely have litte effect id like CCP to note that the same people post on these cloaking posts and turn them into flame wars which in turn gets them locked which would appear to me as an atempt to limit ideas presented in the forum to manipulate the likelyhood of continuation of the imbalance, because they enjoy the current abuse of the mechanic. Bane: while i like the fact that WH is fun for some people i and many other players would prefer not to have to be forced to do it in order to avoid broken mechanics. what you presented was how WH space is less voulerable to cloaks not how it ruins WH space. Derath: you fail to give any real evidence for leaving it the way it is. i feel confident in the evidence i have presented.Thank you so much for your contribution. anything else? Everything you are posting has been suggested a dozen times before. Are you surprised in any way that you get the same replies the last twelve people got?
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:23:00 - [18] - Quote Dragoon..... im sorry, you are the worst troll ive ever seen, please for the life of you post something you havent posted before. a reward? really thats your excuse? my suggestions leave those aspects in tacked. Danika. please leave its clear you dont want to be apart of the conversation. I have made my case now give me something real i can see logic in. is there noone out there with a legitimate thesis against the balancing of cloaking? are there none amung us.
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:28:00 - [19] - Quote Why should I take time out of my day, constructing a brand new post for threads that provide, in no way, any new or meaningful ideas?
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:31:00 - [20] - Quote You shouldnt. so i suggest you talk about why my ideas are flawed specificly but rather you've shown not to put forth the effort. and should you not wish to do so do not post reply to this post anyfurther because id like you to stay on topic.
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:33:00 - [21] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: You shouldnt. so i suggest you talk about why my ideas are flawed specificly but rather you've shown not to put forth the effort. and should you not wish to do so do not post reply to this post anyfurther because id like you to stay on topic. I've already told you why your idea is flawed, you only address one half of the subject and not the other half! Wow, how many times do I have to say it!?
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 2123	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:35:00 - [22] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: Derath: you fail to give any real evidence for leaving it the way it is. i feel confident in the evidence i have presented.Thank you so much for your contribution. anything else? The difference is that you made this thread not I. So the onus is on you to convince us that your arguments have merit. You may feel confident in the evidence you have presented, but given this thread so far it is clearly lacking. That being said, here is an example of what I feel is a legitimate use of long term (possibly afk) cloaking. It also illustrates well how cloaking is in fact a counter to the current state of local. I could be ninja roaming around 0.0 space in my non-covert explorer (say ishtar) that I do happen to keep a cloak on. I get chased down and camped in a system. Exits are bubbled and covered, combat probes are out. My only real option is to safe up and cloak, hoping to wait them out. With the current log off timers they will have me probed before my timer is up. I cannot even safely check the gates as i cannot warp cloaked. And due to the perfect nature of local intel my hunters know 2 key things. 1. I'm still in the system and 2. I'm still logged in. So my option becomes a waiting game. Pretty much all of your proposed ideas penalizes me for simply trying to survive.
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:35:00 - [23] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: You shouldnt. so i suggest you talk about why my ideas are flawed specificly but rather you've shown not to put forth the effort. and should you not wish to do so do not post reply to this post anyfurther because id like you to stay on topic. Why is it that you're now trying to accuse anyone who disagrees with you of trolling and asking them to leave rather than actually defending your (often repeated) idea?
LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:37:00 - [24] - Quote anyone else have any ideas? im still interested. you could also propose to have a special ship designed around the idea of finding cloaked ships using propes or sensors.
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2612	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:41:00 - [25] - Quote Which would hit the exact same problems you refuse to recognise, and has ALSO been posted a dozen times.
Johnson Dragoon Journey. 13	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:44:00 - [26] - Quote ... Cloak hunthing ship: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4422625 Shot down. Cloak using fuel: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3681813 Shot down Pos that can decloak/detect cloakers https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=140895 Shot down. Do you want me to continue the pattern? Just to show how every idea you post to "solve cloak" have all been shot down?
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 2123	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:47:00 - [27] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: anyone else have any ideas? im still interested. you could also propose to have a special ship designed around the idea of finding cloaked ships using propes or sensors. You keep missing the point. You have done nothing but regurgitate the same arguments and solutions that have been proposed many times before. They haven't convinced anyone that a solution needs to be proposed to begin with. Just because you put legitimate in the title doesn't make it any more legitimate than the other countless times the same thing has been posted.
Gigan Amilupar No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 204	Posted - 2014.04.03 23:56:00 - [28] - Quote Ooo, I can see the future, spooky. Now that that is out of the way, I'm going to stick my foot in it. I'm only doing this because this thread actually isn't a half-baked idea, it's a request for a discussion. And thus I will now throw out my own idea which I'm sure will be proven to be half-baked by someone eventually (I can't believe I'm doing this). Alright, so the root of the issue does interact with power projection on some level but that is a problem worthy of its own discussion. If we focus exclusively on the "issue", and I'm hesitant to call it that, of afk cloaking then most of the problems come up not as bad mechanics surrounding cloaking itself, but rather the bad mechanics that currently surround intel gathering on account of local. The problem being that if you introduce mechanics that too strongly oppose cloaking it will quickly ruin its use entirely. So what we need is to change the way intel is gathered, and from there introduce something cloaking specific while keeping in mind all the other things that we don't want to affect (gate camps, station games, wormhole life). So here is my proposal. 1: Local. It needs to go. It's free intel with no more effort then looking at a box and scrolling down. And while that is, admittedly, how most intel is displayed to us in the game, it still needs to be cut. We cannot even remotely move forward in this discussion until everyone admits that having a complete list of everyone in system, updated in real time, is a bad thing. 2: Cloaking. Cloaking in fine. Really, I mean it. There is an argument to be made that no one should be completely safe while undocked, and the almost complete inability to effect anyone who is cloaked is not very EvE-like. But at the same time if you compromise cloakings apparent "safety" it loses all its uses. What needs to be done is to allow cloaks to operate with almost as much impunity as they currently have while simultaneously allowing for a degree of counter play. "But cloaking is a counter!" you say. Your right, it is, FOR THE MOST PART. Offensive applications of cloaking aren't exactly a counter. They're more of a tactical advantage that comes at the cost of reduced firepower and flexibility. And introducing a degree of counter to those situations while protecting cloakings ability to counter the things it was implemented to (like gate camps) is what needs to be strived for if we are discussing changes. 3: The proposal. With the introduction of mobile structures CCP has created a game mechanic that allows for specific situational use that can come with arbitrary restrictions. And this is exactly the approach that would have to be taken if we want to change cloaking, and therefor mobile structures fit the bill. We simply cannot introduce probes or ships or large-scale POS mods to accomplish anything without ruining cloaking in its entirety. So how do we do this? A) Remove local chat. If we are reducing cloakings abilities in any manner then we need to ensure that those who are cloaked are actually hidden. B) Introduce a mobile structure with low EHP. Let's call it a "Light Diffraction Array" (name pending). The LDA would have to be extremely vulnerable to destruction and have no reinforcement timer. I imagine ghost sites would be a good way to introduce this mobile structure, but that is another conversation. It would be very quick to deploy and pick up, somewhere in the realm of 1 minute. Long enough for it to get blapped of field, short enough for it to be moved around fairly easily. I imagine that both its size and sig would be quite large to keep it from being too mobile however. C) The LDA would create a sphere with a radius of 20km. Inside of this radius, any ships that do not have permission from the array cannot cloak. Said permission would be granted by the player who deployed the LDA and could be updated or changed as necessary. The idea here is to create some counterplay, this would potentially allow for bait ships to be surrounded by cloaky T3's and would be good fun as a result. D) The LDA cannot be deployed within 100km of Stations, Stargates, Acceleration Gates, Wormholes, or other LDA's (equipping two cloaks cancel each other out, why not the deployable?) but has no restrictions around POS's. Such a restriction would be largely unnecessary; Wormholers who put eyes on a POS from 200km away in a stealth ships are effectively enough hidden that no short range-detector is going to ruin their play. Not even a whole lot of them thanks to the distance restriction to other LDA's. These distances should also prevent the deployable from creating OP gatecamps and making station games even less fun. Thus we have created a small degree of counter play. Mining fleets can put one of these out in belts and see if a cloaky T3 or bomber is approaching, but the travel distance of bombs will still be long enough that bombers should be able to perform their runs on targets if said runs are well executed. Hot dropping inside of brawling range would now be considerably more difficult, but I imagine that there are creative ways to get around that. Local is gone however, so players are going to have to be actively watching their surroundings/overview to gather intel rather then the chat box. While not a huge difference, one list to another, it is still a step in the right direction as a way to properly disseminate intel through the UI. The key point is that the deployable has to be cumbersome enough not to affect small gang negatively, but still mobile enough to be used for operations. I also see this as a way to slightly affect cloaky farmers in FW plexes. So that could be fun. There is my "idea" that I'm sure will be met with rage. Sadly I'm sure I've overlooked something and am also sure that this topic will fulfill the expectations in my link given enough time.
Petrified Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance 88	Posted - 2014.04.04 00:08:00 - [29] - Quote LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: #1 Pos decloak modules: ... There should be no easy counter to Cloaking. This is an easy counter and takes no player skill to avoid. So Nope. See #2 LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: #2 Cloak probes:... I appreciate and endorse the ability to use probes to detect the general location of a cloaked ship. However, nothing should be able to de-cloak the ship without being in the standard 2KM of the vessel. If the probes brought you withing 15+ KM of the ship and you then had to work to decloak them from there, fine. But this cannot be an automatic "decloak button" - sometimes explorers need to use the restroom in systems without stations or they cannot dock in. But a probing mechanic is the only acceptable counter to cloaking that would be acceptable in my mind. LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: #3 the dreaded cloaking Fuel: ... Why? they are not jumping from one system to another via cyno. They are not able to take any offensive or defensive action and unless they are in a covert-ops, they cannot even warp. All action that a covert ops ship can take against you can only be done when they are not cloaked. Fuel is a pointless addition, not a counter, and is a punishment to non-afk cloakers. See #2 LOOOOOOOL RANDOMALT wrote: #4 AFK Timers: ... Again, it punishes non-afk cloakers by placing a limit on their ability to sit somewhere cloaked. See #2. I have been on both ends of AFK cloaking. I know how many people feel about this because Covert Ops ships are what I commonly fly. I know how it is to be in a wormhole or Null Sec and not able to take much industrial action outside the station/POS because you know someone is there... watching... waiting... and that you cannot undock in anything outside of a PvP ship and even then, not be certain that you have the right ship or the numbers in local to address whatever may happen. I know how it is to be flying a covert ops ship through gate camps or through wormhole space. I know how it is to desperately need to take a break but cannot do so safely without cloaking up in a safe. I know how it is to stop an opponents operations just by being in system with them. The only reasonable counter - because Cloaking does not have to be nerfed - is adding a probing ability to approximate the location of a cloaked ship. Outside of that, no other option comes close to reasonable.
Mike Voidstar Voidstar Free Flight Foundation 498	Posted - 2014.04.04 00:16:00 - [30] - Quote Bane Nucleus wrote: No one in wormhole space ever feels that cloaking is abused....EVER. Also, lots of cloakies die in wormhole. They aren't the invulnerable ships people make them out to be. With no local, we have no idea they are even there until they decloak. Then we kill them. It's not a broken mechanic at all. No cynos, no fixed "gates", limited mass on wormholes, etc...All of those things limit the force projection in wormhole space, which is the real problem you are talking about. In null sec, people claim that a cloaky can stop an entire system from doing sites, mining, and other various pve activities. Is that because of the cloak or because existing null sec mechanics allow it? (cynos, no mass limited entrances into system, etc..) Those issues simply don't exist for us in wormhole space and we have the same cloaking mechanic that you do. This is exactly the problem. Local is manifestly not a problem either. It's value is only seen in areas where local residents put out the considerable effort and manpower to secure the space against enemy incursion. High Sec is the proof of this concept...it's awash in neutrals, has an omnipotent police force to flawlessly punish aggressors, and ganks happen all the time. It is neither over powered nor infallible by itself, it is only with dedicated effort of whole alliances that it becomes useful for preemptive defense. 90% of all problems with cloaks would be solved by making them mutually exclusive with Cynos. Once you stop the fact that the safest ship in all of eve can suddenly be anything from a newb frigate to a Titan Fleet in your space, they become much more balanced. Covert Cynos are not nearly the same problem despite the fact that they become battleship fleets with minimal effort because they are still BLOPS and you can account for a limited number of T2 Battleships and what they might be worth risking for. Cloaks should be huntable. No ship in space should be so safe as to be able to literally afk for an entire day with any kind of certainty of not exploding, especially in enemy territory. That is just goofy and clearly broken.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.