True but the fact that so many threads existist says that their is an issue and has been yet really hasn't been acted on or even discuessed. In my long time watching these the ads I haven't really seen anything about it from ccp on ideas / solutions.. I guess the question is.. is the issue something of importance to other people or is it just another captains quarter's

no it doesn't, its just telling of the fact that most people hate psychological warfare.

First off, cloaking is very balanced.

With the way local is now, you know they are there, most not where they are. They can't interact with anything while cloaked, and must decloak to directly affect anyone.

Second, give me your stuff/biomass.

Finally, inb4lock.

Yes. It's so balanced that there are hundreds of pages of people talking about how it's not. It's one of the most talked about items on the forums.

Yes. It's so balanced that there are hundreds of pages of people talking about how it's not. It's one of the most talked about items on the forums.

By all clockly threads being rule 17nd is this ccps way of saying they aren't willing to deal with an important issue.

I don't see it as being unwilling to discuss an issue but rather that to CCP this is very probably and rightly a non-issue.

J
- The ultimate safety net. I can be chased by 100's of ships. As long as I make it past the gate camp, there is no possible way a cloak can be found in system. The cloak pilot has 1 challenge and that is the gate. However if I am a cloak pilot and I see the threat as being too high. I can just go afk and wait or just log off.

That's just an assumption though. It's just as plausible to say that CCP isn't commenting cause they have no idea how to fix the issue.

Con's

- AFK Camping. Though an accepted tactic by CCP it does frustrate many players, as there is no counter. Either risk operating in the system OR move to another system. There is no way to eject the stealth player from the system.
- Ship hiding. I can literally have billions of isk worth of ships floating in space and no one would ever know. I can have a rorq on grid in a belt. As soon as there is a threat, I simply cloak the ship. Unless you witnessed the ship cloaking, you would have no idea where it was.
- The ultimate safety net. I can be chased by 100's of ships. As long as I make it past the gate camp, there is no possible way a cloak can be found in system. The cloak pilot has 1 challenge and that is the gate. However if I am a cloak pilot and I see the threat as being too high. I can just go afk and wait or just log off.

These are just a few examples. There are plenty more.

This does not mean it is imbalanced.

If you look at the threads, for every person who thinks it is not balanced, there are many more saying it is with much more rationale.

It has been discussed to DEATH and then some. This is why they are locked, because there is LITERALLY nothing more to say on the matter that has not already been said a THOUSAND times.

• Why are you in nullsec if one neutral scares you to death? For godsakes, nullsec ratting grounds are safer than highsec and you're complaining about danger. Moreover, why do you need to "eject that stealth player from the system"? Since you're so adamant that you must be able to do it, perhaps you can explain why.
• What can you do with billions in cloaked ships? Oh, that's right, nothing. Cloaked ships cannot interact or do anything except float around in space. Maybe they can get decloaked by an errant bit of debris or perhaps if they're covert-capable they can warp around some, but that's it. Literally every other interaction requires decloaking.
• I can do the same thing with a MWD cruiser (or smaller), a safespot (a celestial can work too) and double-clicking in a random direction. By the time an aggressor scans me down, gets a warp-in and lands, I'm already out of range. An interceptor can keep this game up literally forever without ever touching a cloak. Also, you can just log off regardless of your ship having a cloak or not.

Your move, sir.

"if you really want him he's not safe sure you have to put some time in but there are only so many ways to get out of a system."

So I have to wait for him to come to me? What are the likely chances that will happen? I can spend hours waiting while the player is logged off and never see him. Eventually he will log in and leave.

Just because there's more intensity of posting by people that don't think it's s problem doesn't mean that they have a better case or represent the players better. It may be that more people that like cloaky camping post more and nothing else.

Ultimately the only thing that matters is what CCP thinks about this tactic and how players respond to it. You might feel great in saying the cloaky whiners just need to adapt, but if they don't and CCP loses an account over it, that matters more than how well you sleep at night because of your amazing display of forum logic.

I agree with the OP that CCP should at least address the issue as they have addressed many others that were just as controversial (freighter ganking in highsec for instance). At least them we would know their position on gameplay and how it relates to their view of player satisfaction.

Yes your example had 100 people chasing him... take shifts

if you want to catch him wait for him or bait him out if hes not worth the trouble then don't

A year and a half into his watch...

And I'll just leave these two links here:

AFK Cloaking Collection Thread
AFK Cloaking Collection Thread--second set of links

After all those threads and all those pages....CCP has opted to say: nothing. This, in and of itself, should tell people something. All that sturm und drang has not motivated CCP to offer even a whisper should indicate that CCP finds the current cloaking mechanic acceptable.

Just because there's more intensity of posting by people that don't think it's s problem doesn't mean that they have a better case or represent the players better. It may be that more people that like cloaky camping post more and nothing else.

Ultimately the only thing that matters is what CCP thinks about this tactic and how players respond to it. You might feel great in saying the cloaky whiners just need to adapt, but if they don't and CCP loses an account over it, that matters more than how well you sleep at night because of your amazing display of forum logic.

I agree with the OP that CCP should at least address the issue as they have addressed many others that were just as controversial (freighter ganking in highsec for instance). At least them we would know their position on gameplay and how it relates to their view of player satisfaction.

Reported for redundancy.

I see the usual circle of arguments are on going. As yet, the anto cloak brigade have failed to show an issue. Other than 'I can see him in local, he scares me.'

Daichi

Why are you adverse to the idea of changing cloak? If it brings about more PVP, wouldn't that be good?

That applies to everyone really that feels that this topic is talked to death?

Why is the argument to not change anything. Any change to cloak would result in more PVP. So many topics about how people camp in stations and pos, and so many wanting timers for people to be kicked out of station. Yet it's the exact same thing with trying to fight a cloak in system. You just can't do it.

My other example of how I can just hide a Rorq when I dont want to fight. This again avoids PVP.

Wouldnt changes to increase PVP be a benefit?

Of course you would see it that way Mags. Although that ignores the three reasons that I already brought up here in the thread, two of those not being afk cloak camping.

Easiest way to avoid the topic is to close it I guess.

CCP also thought that jump range was fine too. We see they have changed their mind.

Because you like every other complainer, looks at cloaks only. If you had your way, null would be even safer than it already is.

It's currently balanced, deal with it.

So balanced that CCP is completely upending it with the change to jump drives.....

CCP also thought that jump range was fine too. We see they have changed their mind.

No they post with more rationale. Rather than the people who open these threads who think its unfair for a player to do little more than sit in local. No one was ever killed by a cloaked afk player. Sitting afk in space is fine. Cloaking is fine.

CCP have made their position known.

OP just needs to stop being a null bear and deal with the problem using any of the myriad of ways that have been presented in these threads. Or he can go back to hi-sec where he probably belongs anyways.

Just because you agree with someone, doesn't mean it has more rationale for everyone. And I not going to agur with you about cloaking, since that's off topic.

If CCP has made their position known, please provide a link or your statement is meaningless.

I personally wont back down from the idea that cloak is unbalanced. There are far too many examples of how its not balanced, even if you want to say that they arent examples.

It stands to read that cloak should be looked at as well. It can too easily be abused.

I dont want them gone. I want to find an kill them. This unfortunately ruffles the feathers of the cloakies that so enjoy hiding behind them.

Several people have made suggestions on how to change cloaks or add cloak hunting to the game. Many of them are good ideas.

Just because you agree with someone, doesn't mean it has more rationale for everyone. And I not going to agur with you about cloaking, since that's off topic.

If CCP has made their position known, please provide a link or your statement is meaningless.

"No, you want easy kills to pad your killboard.

]You really are reaching now and failing rather badly.

And well made points like:
'What mechanic is the AFK cloaker using to interact with you?'.

Another example of an ad hominem.

"No, you want easy kills to pad your killboard. There are already several methods to catch cloaky ships as the come into system. Use any number of them."

Thank you for validating this thread and every one before it in regards to cloaking.

If you feel that a change to cloak would suddenly make you an easy target, its going to bias everything you have to say. You can make all the points you want, but ultimately this statement is how you feel.

Adding a way to hunt cloakies shatters your safety net. You suddenly have to fight to survive. However you ask miners to do this all the time.

Really? Interesting.

This is a good example of an ad hominem statement. 100% irrelevant to the proposed topic.

I dont want them gone. I just want to find and kill them.

I believe that's mine.

So, to answer the OP's question, the reasons that the cloak threads keep getting locked are as follows:
Redundancy
Redundancy
Redundancy
Fundamental lack of respect
Topic quickly devolves from an intelligent discussion to a sh**-flinging bonanza

Actually, you're incorrect in your presumption there.


When you account that the majority of ships used by cloaky campers are of the covops frigate types, and therefore not all that tanky, the premise that he is, indeed, looking for easy kills is not out of the question.

The OP was asking why all of the threads about cloaks keep getting locked. The conversation you have quoted here is tangential to the discussion that was originally started.

I'm not saying that your point was invalid. Just that it was a negative comment directed at an individual and has no relevant value to the topic at hand. Unless I'm somehow misunderstanding what you said.

Also, in no way am I saying that people are not free to defend themselves or their ideas if they feel the need to do so. I'm just pointing out that it's statements like this one and the other one that I quoted which have a tendency to irritate or anger another poster, who will then likely also feel that he needs to defend himself. It just kinda snowballs from there.

Yet that was not your accusation. Your accusation was my comment being ad hominem attack, when it was not.

Oddly enough, this is another reason why threads get locked. People derail the thread to discuss other things.

There is more to the cloak issue than just AFK camping though. There is an issue with cloaking. It's not a balanced mechanic.

Dont get me wrong. Cloaking is great, but it's by far one of the safest ways to fly in this game. Unless there is pilot error, there is little chance a cloaky can be engaged on if he/she doesnt wish to engage in a fight.

There is more to the cloak issue than just AFK camping though. There is an issue with cloaking. It's not a balanced mechanic.

Dont get me wrong. Cloaking is great, but it's by far one of the safest ways to fly in this game. Unless there is pilot error, there is little chance a cloaky can be engaged on if he/she doesnt wish to engage in a fight.

Oh I am done. I got my answer from Daichi. It validates what I have been saying for a while in regards to why the PVPers constantly fight against cloak changes.

It takes away their safety net.

Though in answering that, it shows why the cloaky threads get closed. They often degrade to just name calling, passive aggressiveness, and much like what happened here. They stray off topic.

Negative, well yes one could argue that and you would even find me agreeing up to a point.

It being an Ad Hom? No, sorry.

At this point I, others and CCP have grown tired of the same old illogical arguments and fallacies. Hence one of the reasons why they now shut these down asap. It's also one of the reasons for many negative responses.

Oh I am done. I got my answer from Daichi. It validates what I have been saying for a while in regards to why the PVPers constantly fight against cloak changes.

It takes away their safety net.

Though in answering that, it shows why the cloaky threads get closed. They often degrade to just name calling, passive aggressiveness, and much like what happened here. They stray off topic.

Yes. It's so balanced that there are hundreds of pages of people talking about how it's not. It's one of the most talked about items on the forums.

Everyone complaining is someone who plays WoW on a PVE server. It's talked about a lot, because half of eve is people expecting World of Boringcraft.

Speaking of straying off topic, answer me two questions. When do the nerfs stop? When you have gotten everything you want nerfed, and are finally happy with your game, what about the next guy who wants to nerf how you play your game?

Catch me in game. We can discuss it. Though go back to my post about the addition of a hunting frig. Read that and see that I suggested a complete removal of local, and replaced ship detection with D Scan Then actual hunting done through the tactical overview. These two things would work with the addition of the ship.

Look I live in null and I love null space. Yes I am an industrial player, no I dont play WoW. I started out playing Shadowbane, which is almost identical to Eve but in a Fantasy setting. These changes I am suggestion are not cause of some fear of cloak or anything. I honestly see cloak as unbalanced. I find being in a cloaked ship to be insanely safe and basically easy mode. Shadowbane had a very well balanced system for stealth characters. I have tried to use its basis for the suggestions I have made about cloaking.

If nothing ever changes, I dont honestly care but that doesnt mean that I am going to half heartily argue my stance.

If someone makes a suggestion that changes my play style, I will consider it and if it helps the game then more than likely I will go with it. Might not like it but change happens.

Cloaky threads, to address the original topic, have two sides frequently show up.

The first side tends to complain that this tactic is very effectively killing their type of gameplay.
This can be true, up to a point.
The real issue is that the means to resolve the issue moving forward does not exist, so they instead argue in favor of moving backwards.
Moving backwards often in the form of a nerf to cloaking, in such a way that they can resume how they want to play with little effort as possible.

Second side proves the balance exists.
It may be crude, and only demonstrates that two absolutes exist, which are countering each other.
Absolute intel opposing absolute concealment.
It proves that balance does NOT automatically translate into good gameplay for all involved, or else group one would not be making their arguments I detailed above.

I truly believe that CCP feels too much of their player base would be overwhelmed, were they to remove the mutually absolute nature of these two aspects.
Yes, free local with it's application as intel DOES dumb down the game.
Yes, perfect concealment with it's consequent overhanging threat aspect DOES dumb down the game.

It seems apparent that these mechanics have immense potential, if they are delegated to player effort instead.
And with any immense potential, the emergent play pattern can be devastating.

They are rightfully cautious around this issue.
It is VERY likely that something unexpected would result, and preparing for that must be their first priority.

CCP also thought that jump range was fine too. We see they have changed their mind.

I agree with the OP, in that there should not be a ban on discussing certain elements of gameplay unless it's exploits.

Sure, the cloaking discussions have been done to death, and CCP/community has their opinion on it, I even share that opinion for the most part. I don't like the censorship none the less.

What if, just what if someone pulls a rabbit out of the hat and comes up with an idea that actually does make sense in regards to cloak changes. That thread would be immediately locked. That's no good.

To aske Mag's question again:

Exactly how do you know there is a guy cloaked in system?

Answer that please Behr?

Well....does anyone on the anti-cloak side have the balls to even attempt to answer this question?

I think the point is that they don't have a set.

Well....does anyone on the anti-cloak side have the balls to even attempt to answer this question?

Sure, I'll bite. The answer is local. If you look at my suggests on the changes to cloak, I have always included the removal of local, in exchange for cloak hunting

...

Balanced is an unfortunate word in that it carries with it the connotation of "good" for many people. To see this, consider the term "balanced diet". WTF does that mean? 33% carbs, 33% protein, 33% fat? The current Western Diet? If these are also "good", why are so many people getting diabetes and its related health problems (kidney problems, heart disease, obesity, metabolic derangement, etc.)?

"Balanced" can actually be bad depending on the context. A "balanced diet" in terms of 33% carbs, 33% protein, 33% fat is a great example as it will most likely end up killing people well before they should die.

This actually comes pretty close to the mark, I think.

We want balance at the start of an encounter, in an ideal world.
Each side having the perception of fairness, if not advantage, so they feel confident when engaging.

The true problem here, is that player effort is not permitted or involved along these two aspects.

You can't make any effort to better know details about a target's presence. Local chat is telling both sides all they need to know, in order to make their decision.
You can't make any better effort to hide a cloaked ship. You have the maximum perfect concealment automatically.
As that is obvious to both sides, the result is as well.

The issue is made manifest, in that the balance is never broken. Sure, one side might make a mistake, but the chances of this fail to restore good game play. It simply is too remote, especially when dealing with experienced players.

We end up with a stalemate, as is always the case with perfect balance.
If neither side in a conflict gets the upper hand, it is never resolved.

17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

26. Re-opening locked topics is prohibited.

Recreating or re-opening a thread that has been closed by a moderator is prohibited. Threads that have been closed by a moderator have been closed for the benefit of the community. Re-opening a locked thread will result in its removal.

-snip-

OK so after reading the last few posts and others, it's pretty clear that no amount of discussion will lead you to understand anything from my point of view...

OK so after reading the last few posts and others, it's pretty clear that no amount of discussion will lead you to understand anything from my point of view.

Couple examples as to why people get frustrated and topics about cloak get locked. They often degrade to petty arguing.

1. "That's great, but your suggestion is:
1. Probably not balanced."

- All this has done is show that you arent interested in looking as suggestions. Either from burn out or whatever, however you expect other people to read what you put up. Just in this example, my suggestion is in this exact thread and is not all that long, yet you didn't take the time to read it. I am sure your excuse is that "it's probably like all the others" and you dont need to read it.

2. "Let me also add I think cloaking/local are balanced; just not balanced very well."

- To me this makes little sense. Regardless of what the so called understanding of "balance" we all know what the implication of it is. Effective game play for both sides. Something that is balanced, yet unbalanced is ultimately unbalanced.

3. Adjustments to cloak is just a way to pad kill boards with easy kills, as stated a couple pages back

- This in itself is the underlying mentality of the PVPers. As it stands now. Cloak is a huge safety net. Any changes to it would take away part of that safety. I personally feel this safety net takes away from the game of Eve by providing the safety net that exists now and leaves people in a stalemate. And this isn't just afk cloaky camping. I personally dont put much thought into that anymore. A quick look at killboards can tell you if a camper is there to kill or just be annoying. No one complains about this though, and it provides far more info than local.

Look I do understand what you are saying. Local does give away your existence in system however that is just one variable. It is balanced in the regard that I know you are there and you know I am there. That part is balanced. However you can engage on me and I am unable to do anything but defend myself. Now I dont see this as bad. Stealth ships need to be able to have the element of surprise, however they dont need to have ultimate safety anywhere they go.

Your argument also is heavily biased against ratters and renters. This leads to threads like this being closed as well as it again degrades down to name calling again. Myself, I can see what you are saying and I respect it. I just disagree with it. Try putting yourself in the seat of an industrial player and see what they are saying.

I think the general concenisios is cloaky/local isn't ideal. A few questions then:

1. Has CCP ever shared their opinion on the local/cloaky issue to anybodies recolection?

2. Does a change in the local/cloak balance support CCPs current initiative to reduce force project?

3. If local was removed and some sort of cloak detection system was put in place would finding targets become too difficult for PVP roamers?

Has CCP ever shared their opinion on the local/cloaky issue to anybodies recolection?

I'm not a fan of cloak nerfs, but I have to say this:

Is there any other way to cause as much deterrence to an opposing force as there is with cloaking? Is it reasonable to be able to cause others billions in lost revenue simply by logging in an alt and going AFK for the day?

Keep cloaking, nerf AFK.

There have been lengthy discussions on how to solve this problem. Or to put it differently,is it reasonable to nerf somebody else's game just because you don't want to put in the effort?