|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
264
   |
Posted - 2015.01.12 15:03:34 -
[1] - Quote
Afk cloakers arent an issue in wspace because we didnt see them to begin with, unless our scout saw them enter system
Afk cloakers are only an issue in nullsec generally, and possibly lowsec. Although I rarely hear lowsec complain about it, certainly no where near as much as nullsec does.
Why is it an issue in kspace but not in wspace? Well the answer is simple, Local Chat Channel.
Just remove local from kspace. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
264
|
Posted - 2015.01.12 15:23:58 -
[2] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Just remove local from kspace. Remove cloaked from local kspace. Won't solve cynos but "real" afk cloakers won't be a problem.
If I am an afk cloaker, what affect do I have if there is no local and no one knows I am there?
Id rather cloaked ships be cloaked from local. Noncloaked ships show up in local. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 15:25:54 -
[3] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Id rather cloaked ships be cloaked from local. Noncloaked ships show up in local. That's what i proposed. While I agree that this would solve the AFK cloak problem some have, it should come with other balancing factors. A simple move like this could make cloakers a little too powerful, unless other changes took place.
So you think cloaked ships in w-space are OP?
The thing is that nullsec carebears and nullsec pvp pilots dont work together. When we do pve in wspace, we usually lock down our system. Scouts on the holes, collapse as many as we can and secure the space. We work together and benefit from it.
Problem with that in nullsec is the carebears are greedy and the pvp pilots always want to be out roaming. When nullsec carebears learn to work together to lock down a system for PVE then the PVP cloakers will have a much harder time affecting them. Bubble your gates, have scouts, have people ready to intercept anything coming, and for Bob's sake learn to close your wormholes. I've infiltrated so many nullsec systems because they're too busy mining to notice the k162 in their system.
I am convinced that nullsec is just fat and lazy.
CCP, please remove the respawning of anomalies in nullsec. Make those fat, lazy carebears have to go into other systems for more PVE. We have to do it in w-space. They should have to in nullsec as well. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2015.03.07 19:30:17 -
[4] - Quote
Ive been saying that all this time. Cloaks are not an issue in wspace. Local channel is the issue. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2015.03.07 22:19:21 -
[5] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Haywoud Jablomi wrote:I do find that rather amazing. CCP is ok with a broke mechanic. Good bet is that they don't see it as a broken mechanic. As a start. Would also recommend everyone give that cast a listen as it's quite informative.
Its funny when people think something is broken because it counters their gameplay. This game is all about counters. People say ECM is broken, bit it does what it is supposed to do. Cloaking works fine. Its not broken. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 08:56:59 -
[6] - Quote
I hope they remove local from kspace. Nullsec needs more risk. They have plenty of rewards already. Respawning anomalies within minutes? I wish I had that in my wormhole. when I exhaust my system of resources I have to jump into other systems. I definitely dont complain about it either. Its what we do with what we have. Yet I hear nullsec babies cry that they dont make enough isk in 1 system and are so scared of 1 guy in a cloaked ship that they wont undock.
When CCP removes local, you nullsec babies wont know if someone is cloaked in your system. Then you will have to decide. Stay docked or undock and actually take a risk to make some isk. When I log into my wormhole, I expect there to be several proteus cloaked up next to me ready to eat my ship alIve. It doesnt stop me from leaving my pos though. Im not scared of internet pixel spaceships. Nullbears need to learn to not be scared. Its just a video game.
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
315
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 17:44:47 -
[7] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Rhavas wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:It seems broken that I can ... [sit] in someone's money system 24/7 as a strategic tool to disrupt their income Translation: I have a right to this ISK. I shouldn't have to work for it if I get sov, declaring it "my money system" and worthy of absolute safety. In wormholes, you declare a system "our money system" by kicking everyone else out, putting a POS on every damn moon in the system, scanning constantly, having bubbles and multi-sebo Interceptors constantly on hand to grab crashers and frigates, and doing almost everything in your home in a group for cross-support and reaction. You also sit in space unless you're logged off. THAT is how you own a system. CCP Fozzie wrote:"It's very important that it be possible to disrupt people's moneymaking in nullsec. And AFK cloaking is one of the most effective ways that we have right now to do so." I guess I just don't see the logic in being able to increase someone else's risk factor while assuming none myself.
nullbear logic is that everything is broken if the nullbear is too scared to undock.
Zero Security, NullSecurity, Nullsec should mean what it says. No security. That means it should not have the security of a free intel channel. Dont be so scared of change, nullbears. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
318
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:53:59 -
[8] - Quote
Chatles wrote:Mag's wrote:Chatles wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Think about it for a second. If local stops showing my avatar and that I'm there and I go AFK then you'll be perfectly 100% safe doing whatever you want to do.
However, with the current mechanic you see that "I am in local" irrespective of whether or not I am AFK or not, and most players will err on the side of caution and assume I am not AFK and stay docked. So while AFK I can keep you from doing anything outside the station.
Removing the current local system actually renders AFK cloaking impotent.
Christ...how may farking times has this been explained? yes we get that but it seems you have a hard time grasping the following you are correct afk cloaking becomes impotent but then hot dropping becomes OMNIPOTENT how is that a solution? Now you're simply being obtuse. how exactly without local and without a way to find said cloakers how is it not. anti local people here just go remove local. which alone will make hot dropping cloakers damn near omipotent. remove local but give me a way to survive too otherwise this wont work. how is me saying this being obtuse? or if you think i still em give me an example of how em i going to defend myself then.
Are you and your friends lazy? I ask because it sounds like you're all too incompetent to scout your gates and scan down your wormholes. Its not brain surgery. Its easy. Put scouts on your gates. Communicate with each other. Would also help if you paid attention too instead of AFKtaring and watching ****. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
319
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 03:23:23 -
[9] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote:Taram Caldar wrote:Nikk Narrel wrote:Taram Caldar wrote:The problem isn't the cloaks themselves. It's the fact that a pilot can affect the game play of an entire system's worth of players in nullsec without even being at their computer.
Anyone who denies that this is a thing is deluding themselves. Having a hostile or neutral in system absolutely does impact how players will interact in the system.
.... Can affect, AND Will affect, are two different things entirely. Why don't we give them a better framework to make their decisions, instead of penalizing the player who, quite literally, is doing nothing to cause the reaction. One would point out that having observed the impact of a cloaky camper, and having observed the impact of an AFK cloaky camper, that you are making a false argument. The fact is that AFK Cloakers DO impact system activity. No matter how you try to slice that apple it will ALWAYS come out as: An AFK cloaker has a direct impact on system activity. Up until now this really wasn't a big deal. But now they plan to tie that system activity to the defense of sov space. THAT is a problem. A person not even at their computer should not have such a dramatic ability to impact the defense of a system. As I sad, I have often been the one DOING the cloaky camping. So arguing that it doesn't work is stupid. It does, anyone with half a brain knows it does and that's why so many people do it. Personally it's never bothered me (until now) since I make my isk in ways a cloaky camper can't impact. But now they can affect an alliance's ability to defend it's space. And, thus... it's a balance issue that needs to be adressed. Stating that you can counter it by flying in fleets is EXACTLY the problem. Allowing 1 person who isn't even at the computer to directly impact the gameplay of pilots who ARE at the computer, is broken. You are missing my point. Right now, the default reaction is to effectively not play, under the condition of hostile presence. That is a reactive effect, and it is resulting in loss of gameplay. Let's introduce mechanics that these afflicted players can use, and still play. And I mean both sides of this issue, so long as they are attempting play that is focused and alert. The PvE craft, too often, are not combat capable to the level of confidence needed to oppose a cloaked ship. We are NOT comparing them to front line PvP hulls here, but covert cloak wielding hulls most likely to evade a gate camp and whatever roams exist. Bring that mining or ratting ship to the same level, and make it clear that good fitting choices mean solid chances to win a fight. 1v1 or XvX, where equal numbers are present. Also, make hot dropping less of a threat, by introducing a spool-up effect. Remember, everyone loses when we are too afraid to risk playing.
Then they, the ones afraid of risk, should ge back to highsec.
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
319
|
Posted - 2015.03.14 18:29:40 -
[10] - Quote
Any change to cloaking is bad. Especially because cloaking is not a problem where I live in wspace. The idea to change cloakimg keeps coming from lazy nullbears who use the local channel as their crutch.
CCP will not change cloaking. Even their recent proposal to change the uncloaking mechanic was reversed. It would have affected wspace too much to justify going ahead with it just to balance bombing runs.
You nullbears can whine, complain, argue and attempt to give ideas of nerfing cloaking. However, it's all wasted time. Cloaking will not change.
Delayed local is the best solution. Having to work for Intel, and maintain gate control is where nullsec should go. Any well defended stronghold has guards at the gates. If you leave them open, its your fault when you get attacked. We maintain scouts on our wormholes. When there's a threat, we fight for hole control. Failing to control that avenue is why we use scouts. We dont have the crutches of Local to lean on. Nullsec should not be such an easy place to lIve. Easy breeds lazy which results in greedy, fat nullbears. |
|
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
322
|
Posted - 2015.03.17 16:58:42 -
[11] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Any change to cloaking is bad. Especially because cloaking is not a problem where I live in wspace. The idea to change cloakimg keeps coming from lazy nullbears who use the local channel as their crutch.
CCP will not change cloaking. Even their recent proposal to change the uncloaking mechanic was reversed. It would have affected wspace too much to justify going ahead with it just to balance bombing runs.
You nullbears can whine, complain, argue and attempt to give ideas of nerfing cloaking. However, it's all wasted time. Cloaking will not change.
Delayed local is the best solution. Having to work for Intel, and maintain gate control is where nullsec should go. Any well defended stronghold has guards at the gates. If you leave them open, its your fault when you get attacked. We maintain scouts on our wormholes. When there's a threat, we fight for hole control. Failing to control that avenue is why we use scouts. We dont have the crutches of Local to lean on. Nullsec should not be such an easy place to lIve. Easy breeds lazy which results in greedy, fat nullbears. I wonder if you would feel the same way if not only could you NOT close the entrances to your space, but that they were visible to anyone in adjacent systems, cynos worked, and there were easily accessible information (in and out of game) on things like # of rats killed and average # of players logged in in your preferred w-space system? I'm thinking you'd probably be singing a new tune. The space you live in comes with a fair degree of "stealth" already, so comparisons are a bit strained and to make simplistic comparisons like you have done are not very well thought out.
I'd love to be able to cyno into another wormhole system. Especially covert cyno. It would make wormhole life more exciting.
I am 100% in favor of removing local from nullsec and making wspace harder and more dangerous too. |
|
|
| |
|