| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
   |
Posted - 2006.11.16 13:44:00 -
[1]
Before I even start this thread, IÆd like to mention two things that CCP said they wanted to encourage and that as a player base weÆve been screaming for:
1)Greater incentive for small / medium scale engagements
2)More front line use of carriers/motherships
Now some of you may know from experience, my corporation makes extensive use of cloaking devices as part of its daily combat routine. We've used them in many situations from cloaking on a gate so we could jump in behind escorted haulers, setting up on sniper camps stupid enough not to move regularly and biding our time to strike a larger fleet on our terms. They are also a valuable tool for a corporation like us in the way that they allow us some freedom of movement in this world of crazy sized fleets (especially with the threat of system defences in future expansions)
Then there is also our mothership which also mounts a cloaking device. We as far as we are awear we are the only corporation using these great ships as they were intended. To wade into battle delivering their deadly cargo knee deep in a 20+ man enemy fleet, not sitting in some god forsaken PoS remotely assigning fighters with impunity is how we believe these ships should be used.
When Kali hits us this is all going to change. We will no longer be able to plan well timed strikes against larger foes as the inevitable blob style response sees us scanned out even under cloak. It does not matter one bit that the scan wonÆt uncloak you, as a well placed wing of drone ships will soon uncover any cloaked group. This is even more of a problem for our mothership as it will now have to take a backseat in combat, as it finds itself unable to hide itself when one of the many alliances weÆve annoyed come looking for it in force.
Looking out side of my personal situation for a moment, why should an elite hauler pilot find himself camped in a system with no hope of escape and an almost definite certainty that he will be probed out and killed? IsnÆt the fact he canÆt go anywhere for the whole day enough of a penalty? Why is there a need to condemn him to almost certain death because whoever is after him canÆt be arsed to withdraw and catch him in the next system as he jumps in? (IÆm a pirate and IÆm happy with the way things are tbh.)
So I ask you CCP where was the sense in actually allowing cloaked ships to be scanned out? Why ruin a way of life and survival for smaller corps such as my own because a few people seem to have an inability to catch a target at a gate, or the brains bait it out? Why relegate the pride of our fleet to sitting at a PoS to ensure its safety when its not involved in a fight?
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 13:52:00 -
[2]
A compromise needs to be made. Should a scan allow detection of cloaked ships? Probably. Should it be easy or quick to find them? Heck no.
You have many good points, and I hope CCP takes them into account.
-[23] Member-
Awesome new space games site, from the editor of E-ON! |
|
Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:08:00 -
[3]
/sighned is considered spam, only post if you have something constructive to say. And /sighned posts will be removed fromt his thread and forums warnings issued for spamming.
- Thanks Hutch.
____
forum rules | Email us
They call me "Hutch" because my name is well... long
Actually we call you "Hutch" because people might get the wrong idea of 'God of Young Boys' - Cortes, sigjacker extrodinaire |
|
Rod Blaine
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:08:00 -
[4]
Well, i can agree with your point.
I see what you do as largely similar to the use of cloaked interdictors. I like cloaked interdictors alot :p
But, on the other hand, cloaked afk recons and covert ops in relatively densely populated areas in 0.0 have way too much effect on the practical possibility for locals to move around freely.
Put ten people afk under cloak in a central system in Curse. Put 5 more afk cloaked in 5 systems around it and half of your enemies will feel unable to move around. Add one or two cloaking dictors and you are completely suffocating enemy ability to move without even being at your keyboard.
That I do find a problem. Even without the afk component those enemies are way too hard to force out fo their safespots.
The question is what to do about it...
Personally, I wouldn't mind adding a timer that simply kicks people in space from the game after 30 minutes of inactivity, or only allows normal (non-covops) cloaks to be active for ten minutes at a time, with a 10 minute timer before you are able to activate again. But we all know that those wouldn't solve the issue either.
So what would ? Basing scanning on sovereignty ? Only adds more incentive to anchor more of those stupid pos's. Base it on the number of people scanning for you when you are cloaked ? Meh.
I don't know. I agree that simply making cloaked ships show on scanner is wrong, but the alternative sucks too.
Old blog |
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:12:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Rod Blaine
Well, i can agree with your point.
I see what you do as largely similar to the use of cloaked interdictors. I like cloaked interdictors alot :p
But, on the other hand, cloaked afk recons and covert ops in relatively densely populated areas in 0.0 have way too much effect on the practical possibility for locals to move around freely.
Put ten people afk under cloak in a central system in Curse. Put 5 more afk cloaked in 5 systems around it and half of your enemies will feel unable to move around. Add one or two cloaking dictors and you are completely suffocating enemy ability to move without even being at your keyboard.
That I do find a problem. Even without the afk component those enemies are way too hard to force out fo their safespots.
The question is what to do about it...
Personally, I wouldn't mind adding a timer that simply kicks people in space from the game after 30 minutes of inactivity, or only allows normal (non-covops) cloaks to be active for ten minutes at a time, with a 10 minute timer before you are able to activate again. But we all know that those wouldn't solve the issue either.
So what would ? Basing scanning on sovereignty ? Only adds more incentive to anchor more of those stupid pos's. Base it on the number of people scanning for you when you are cloaked ? Meh.
I don't know. I agree that simply making cloaked ships show on scanner is wrong, but the alternative sucks too.
Yea I can see why that could be an issue, but then again is it CCP's place to compensate for peoples lack of balls to come out and play when there is a lone hostile in system? In some respects its been benifitial in helping some people find their spine again.
|
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:14:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
/sighned is considered spam, only post if you have something constructive to say. And /sighned posts will be removed fromt his thread and forums warnings issued for spamming.
This forum needs a polling option as a guage for support then 
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:18:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Originally by: Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
/sighned is considered spam, only post if you have something constructive to say. And /sighned posts will be removed fromt his thread and forums warnings issued for spamming.
This forum needs a polling option as a guage for support then
dare I say it, but /signed on both OP and quoted up above.
Oh on a sidenote: Whoever actually takes their capital ship to the front lines with a small strike force to beat down a larger force wins, even though they may lose their ships.
Why?
Because they had the guts to do it. Thats why.
|
Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released
Euphoria Unleashed
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:21:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 16/11/2006 14:21:33
Originally by: Rawthorm
Originally by: Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
/sighned is considered spam, only post if you have something constructive to say. And /sighned posts will be removed fromt his thread and forums warnings issued for spamming.
This forum needs a polling option as a guage for support then
game development isn't a democracy 
/me hides
___________________
-Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
|
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:22:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Rawthorm on 16/11/2006 14:24:34
Edited by: Rawthorm on 16/11/2006 14:23:54
Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 16/11/2006 14:21:33
Originally by: Rawthorm
Originally by: Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
/sighned is considered spam, only post if you have something constructive to say. And /sighned posts will be removed fromt his thread and forums warnings issued for spamming.
This forum needs a polling option as a guage for support then
game development isn't a democracy
/me hides
Looking back at some of the changes, you could have fooled me (Then again there have been some issues which the Dev's have done for the good of us all even tho we didnt like it)
Anyway enough about polling and back to the topic at hand 
|
Rod Blaine
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Yea I can see why that could be an issue, but then again is it CCP's place to compensate for peoples lack of balls to come out and play when there is a lone hostile in system? In some respects its been benifitial in helping some people find their spine again.
Well, the problem isn't jsut lone hostiles. They don't scare most people. It's the ability of complete gangs to sit cloaked and be a threath you can't quantify nor force to show it's hand.
Imagine if you owned some space and I sat ten alts in shuttles with a cloak in your main system. What could you do, not knowing what ships i had or wether I was active or even how many people are behind the accounts ?
Now imagine its ten alts in combat ships, and you actually know it's combat ships
What then ?
Cloaked combat gangs are often simply lame. They do need fixing, but preferably in a way that allows the more valid use of claked gangs to remain, and the new scanner isn't that way no.
Old blog |
Jennifer Watson
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:29:00 -
[11]
I approve the OP's post
*starts Mexican wave, which cannot be stopped Forum Mods 
or...* GOOOOOOAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!
|
maarud
Coreli Corporation
Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:36:00 -
[12]
While I agree largely with what you are saying, there's the flip side of the coin, where you enemy takes an alot account and leaves a person AFK 24/7 in your system, making you feel like you can't move least they are about line up gang about to jump in to land on you when ratting or something.
There needs to be a decient middle ground.
I think scanning for cloaked ships should take a considerable amount more time than the normal probing. They should be expensive and the level of accuracy should be extreamly random, so you can warp anywhere from 15km -> 100km of the cloaked ship and when you do warp in, it should be at a random place in a radius of that ship, not so that you warp in facing a straight line to the ship (I'm not sure if this currently does or doesn't happen now).
Thats just my suggestions.
maarud.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
Proudly a Ex-BYDI member |
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:39:00 -
[13]
Originally by: maarud
While I agree largely with what you are saying, there's the flip side of the coin, where you enemy takes an alot account and leaves a person AFK 24/7 in your system, making you feel like you can't move least they are about line up gang about to jump in to land on you when ratting or something.
There needs to be a decient middle ground.
I think scanning for cloaked ships should take a considerable amount more time than the normal probing. They should be expensive and the level of accuracy should be extreamly random, so you can warp anywhere from 15km -> 100km of the cloaked ship and when you do warp in, it should be at a random place in a radius of that ship, not so that you warp in facing a straight line to the ship (I'm not sure if this currently does or doesn't happen now).
Thats just my suggestions.
Still even with some middle ground, should the active cloakers be penilized because of a few lame AFK'ers? If afk cloakers are a problem then introduce a 30 min log off system for idle ships. Would probably free up server resources and cut the number of people in Jita by about 1/4
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
Exquisite Malevolance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:42:00 -
[14]
Ability to detect that there is a cloaked ship within scan range = good.
Ability to know what ship your opponent is cloaked in = very very bad. If you KNOW there are cloaked falcons with a lone BS on a gate, then where's the fun in either setting or springing that trap? You already knew the BS had mates in local, so you already had enough info to suspect a trap. CCP doesnt owe people more info than that, so why are they giving it to them?
I say that you should be able to pick up cloakers on the scanner, but only get "Cloaked Signature" back in the results box. If it says Shiptype: Arazu, for example, there is no longer much point in cloaked recons as part of small gangs, and their only real use is to sneak up on incredibly stupid enemies who dont think of setting scanner to 150km and seeing if there is a recon in grid with you.
---||---
|
Jarvis Drago
Caldari
The Blood Cabal
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:43:00 -
[15]
I agree with the OP.
Make cloaked ships hard as crap to scan out.
I've got a simple solution to the cloaked-afk problem. Make the pilots of cloaked vessels not show up in local.
|
Justice Starcatcher
Asguard Security Service
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:46:00 -
[16]
Actually being able to probe out cloaked ships sounds fine to me, but only if they remove local.
I find it strange to support removing local after all this time  , but my need for local has always been that I had no other tool to avoid being suprised. If probes now scan out cloaked ships, fair enough don't let them be seen in local and its my fault for not probing for them.
What the... |
maarud
Coreli Corporation
Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:47:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Still even with some middle ground, should the active cloakers be penilized because of a few lame AFK'ers? If afk cloakers are a problem then introduce a 30 min log off system for idle ships. Would probably free up server resources and cut the number of people in Jita by about 1/4
AFAIK, this in place. I know if I'm afk, my client disconnects me, sometimes after a bit of time, other times after a longer length of time.
But there are some not-so wholesome corps/alliances out there that use very dirty tricks, like perhaps a macro, doing stuff on the interface, keeping the client alive.
Is that fair, no. Can we prove it, no. Is there anything we can do about it, no.
If it's not in place, then yes, I agree that there should be a forcefull disconnect on a client that has not had any "use" in about 30mins of last action, but I still think you should be able to probe a cloaked ship to a degree, even if they made it some ridiculous combination of lvl V skills, like "understanding cloaking perfectly", prequisites to scan cloaked ships, Cloaking V, Survey V and Astrometrics V.
This is a game of risk vs reward and no single tatic should be unbeatable, even cloaking.
maarud.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
Proudly a Ex-BYDI member |
Hoshi
DAB
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:47:00 -
[18]
As someone who has spent the last 3 weeks on SiSi just testing probing I can say this.
You can NOT scan/probe for cloaked ships with the new system.
If this is a bug or working as intended I do not know but that's how it currently is.
|
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:52:00 -
[19]
Originally by: maarud
Originally by: Rawthorm
Still even with some middle ground, should the active cloakers be penilized because of a few lame AFK'ers? If afk cloakers are a problem then introduce a 30 min log off system for idle ships. Would probably free up server resources and cut the number of people in Jita by about 1/4
AFAIK, this in place. I know if I'm afk, my client disconnects me, sometimes after a bit of time, other times after a longer length of time.
But there are some not-so wholesome corps/alliances out there that use very dirty tricks, like perhaps a macro, doing stuff on the interface, keeping the client alive.
Is that fair, no. Can we prove it, no. Is there anything we can do about it, no.
If it's not in place, then yes, I agree that there should be a forcefull disconnect on a client that has not had any "use" in about 30mins of last action, but I still think you should be able to probe a cloaked ship to a degree, even if they made it some ridiculous combination of lvl V skills, like "understanding cloaking perfectly", prequisites to scan cloaked ships, Cloaking V, Survey V and Astrometrics V.
This is a game of risk vs reward and no single tatic should be unbeatable, even cloaking.
Ahh the risk and reward arguement. Thing is there is no reward from sitting in a safe being cloaked (safety isnt a reward. I get that if I stay logged off) therefore there shouldnt be any risk.
|
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:57:00 -
[20]
Isnt it enough a cloaked pilot appears in local? Why did we waste all these skill points just to be taged by a probe?
This change has just made covert-ops oudated. OP tactics with cloak is about the best I have ever seen or heard about. Remember except on three classes of ships cloak eats up alot of cpu, which hampers the ships combat abilities. That is enough penalty in my books to being sneaky with a cloaked ship.
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter pirate or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box.
|
maarud
Coreli Corporation
Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 14:57:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Originally by: maarud
Originally by: Rawthorm
Still even with some middle ground, should the active cloakers be penilized because of a few lame AFK'ers? If afk cloakers are a problem then introduce a 30 min log off system for idle ships. Would probably free up server resources and cut the number of people in Jita by about 1/4
AFAIK, this in place. I know if I'm afk, my client disconnects me, sometimes after a bit of time, other times after a longer length of time.
But there are some not-so wholesome corps/alliances out there that use very dirty tricks, like perhaps a macro, doing stuff on the interface, keeping the client alive.
Is that fair, no. Can we prove it, no. Is there anything we can do about it, no.
If it's not in place, then yes, I agree that there should be a forcefull disconnect on a client that has not had any "use" in about 30mins of last action, but I still think you should be able to probe a cloaked ship to a degree, even if they made it some ridiculous combination of lvl V skills, like "understanding cloaking perfectly", prequisites to scan cloaked ships, Cloaking V, Survey V and Astrometrics V.
This is a game of risk vs reward and no single tatic should be unbeatable, even cloaking.
Ahh the risk and reward arguement. Thing is there is no reward from sitting in a safe being cloaked (safety isnt a reward. I get that if I stay logged off) therefore there shouldnt be any risk.
Reward - Keep your enemy extreamly paranoid about his movements and possible severly limiting their movement
Risk - None.
Reward - Being able to carefully select your targets to ships you can easily take down without much risk to your own.
Risk - None.
I could probably go on...
Listen, I'm not dissagreeing with you, I just think there should be a little bit of reward for the guy that spends the time and effort (and it should be considerable time and effort) to find a cloaked ship.
Also, you are sitting in a system at your ship, you should be checking your scanner. Recon and covert ship should ring alarms and you should be trying to keep an eye open for probes too.
If you are afk... well then you should have logged off.
maarud.
Signature removed due to incorrect size (400X120px and 24000 bytes). Please review the forum rules or e-mail us with any questions. You can view you signature here - Petwraith
Proudly a Ex-BYDI member |
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:05:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Rawthorm on 16/11/2006 15:08:26
Originally by: maarud
Reward - Keep your enemy extreamly paranoid about his movements and possible severly limiting their movement
Risk - None.
Reward - Being able to carefully select your targets to ships you can easily take down without much risk to your own.
Risk - None.
I could probably go on...
Listen, I'm not dissagreeing with you, I just think there should be a little bit of reward for the guy that spends the time and effort (and it should be considerable time and effort) to find a cloaked ship.
Also, you are sitting in a system at your ship, you should be checking your scanner. Recon and covert ship should ring alarms and you should be trying to keep an eye open for probes too.
If you are afk... well then you should have logged off.
TBH tho, point one is generaly a waste of your time just sitting there and for that reason most people just don't do it (one could also argue its the same risk > reward ratio as using alt spies). As for point two, that requires being within visual and scramble range in most cases to be effective. That also brings the danger of being decloaked and the usual problems of recalibration and lock time if you do decide to engage. It isnt a clear cut advantage as you'd belive and the cloaks many down sides tend to be a risk in their own right.
In any case don't think im argueing for the sake of it, I do aprechiate the support on increasing the dificulty of a cloaked find (and tbh most times it should fail outright) and a compremise is ultimatly better than nothing. I am however still of the firm belief that the cloak is as it should be in its current form.
|
Wizard
Without Reason
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:16:00 -
[23]
Raw, you surly have seen this coming.
Increasingly over the months and indeed last year the game is being geared up more and more towards fullfilment and gratification of the larger entities in game.
All the niches and ways "we" smaller corps find to seek out a fight and to carry out tasks within eve gte brushed aside.
Be thankfull you havent been subjected to logg on traps m8, 3 in the last 2 months  .
Without Reason corp website
^^looking for a PvP corp with little stress then |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:19:00 -
[24]
Being able to find cloakers is IMO essential.
Being able to find them quickly is the opposite.
If someone's hanging around in system for an hour, then I want to be able to dump probes and start tracking them down, or a the very least force 'em to leave. But as a pilot of covops and recons, being able to get picked up too easily is something that I'd rather not see.
|
Imperil
Northern Intelligence
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:32:00 -
[25]
So what? People can still see you in local and make a guess on what ships you fly.
And bringing your Mothership to a system and cloak it is not what i call "used-as-intended". 
Support POS Overhaul - Read it NOW! |
Wild Rho
Amarr
Black Omega Security
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:38:00 -
[26]
I liked someones idea a while ago of cloaks consuming fuel to operate over time meaning that while you can use the cloak to hide from enemies you can't sit at an ss with impunity 23 hours a day.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it.
|
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:40:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Imperil
So what? People can still see you in local and make a guess on what ships you fly.
And bringing your Mothership to a system and cloak it is not what i call "used-as-intended".
If we stuck to that definition we wouldnt even have the ship. It's the out of the box thinking thats allowed us to ambush freighter convoys with it and hit fleets.
You know sometimes I get the feeling this game is loosing the human touch. doing anything now has to be a mechanism rather than a creative idea, and thinking out of the box has to be restricted as much as possible...
|
Aertuun
Ars Caelestis
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:44:00 -
[28]
TomB said that it would be possible for cloaked ships to be probed, but not scanned.
Probing for cloaked ships is fine. Most people on this thread don't have the faintest clue how scan probes work, in the old or new system. Probing for cloaked ships will not be "overpowered".
The only people who will be caught out are those who have gone AFK or are trying to hide huge ships with a basic cloak. It's already extremely difficult to find covops when they're uncloaked, let alone with their cloak on.
Being able to scan for probed ships would be a bit much, but that isn't planned at all, so it shouldn't be a problem.
And as Hoshi said, it isn't currently possible to probe cloaked ships on the test server (how has this been tested? Have we tried using the OMG powerful exploration probes on cloaks?).
|
Imperil
Northern Intelligence
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 15:47:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Originally by: Imperil
So what? People can still see you in local and make a guess on what ships you fly.
And bringing your Mothership to a system and cloak it is not what i call "used-as-intended".
If we stuck to that definition we wouldnt even have the ship. It's the out of the box thinking thats allowed us to ambush freighter convoys with it and hit fleets.
You know sometimes I get the feeling this game is loosing the human touch. doing anything now has to be a mechanism rather than a creative idea, and thinking out of the box has to be restricted as much as possible...
Nothing is stopping you from still doing what you do in Kali. Only difference is that people can find your ships with a probe, and confirm shiptypes instead of looking at local and guess.
Support POS Overhaul - Read it NOW! |
Ar3s
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 16:13:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Ar3s on 16/11/2006 16:15:43
A ship that is designed to be "invisible" should stay "invisible". All other ship types that fit cloaking devices should have the ability removed .....
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |