EVE Search - Kali - The end of guerrilla warfare and our way of life?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Kali - The end of guerrilla warfare and our way of life?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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 19:50:00 - [61] Originally by: Rafein Originally by: Rawthorm I'd also like to bring up another point, what counter do we have to probes? Ah thats right the cloak What you want is role reversal...one that leaves the expensive hard to fit mod being countered by the cheap easy to fit one... not being where they are looking. Probes go all the way up to infinite range. Try again.
The Enslaver Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.16 19:56:00 - [62] Simple thing with cloaking imo; current cloaking specialist ships (covert, recon, stealth bombers) should not be detectable. Other ships should be, but be about 4-5x harder to detect. Normal ships just aren't supposed to be used for geurilla warfare in the same way as recon ships are... And their use as 'omgsafespotcloak' ships is just pathetic imo. And frontline use of motherships/carriers... Well, with the rigs to help your resists/tank and the massive HP boost, I really don't see much of a problem with using them on the front lines. With the current state of motherships on sisi, I would feel comfortable moving one into a group of 20-30 hostiles BS's if it was properly fitted. -------- It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Liisa Freelancing Corp Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:00:00 - [63] Perhaps it could be balanced with the accuracy against cloaked targets. Probing a non-cloaked target gets you pin-point accuracy whilst a cloaked targets lands you somewhere within a 200km sphere of the target. Finding a cloak should be hard, but a probe should also give a general area where the cloaked targets are. Kind of like "they are in there somewhere." Perhaps it is just that cloaks have been overused for suck afk tactics that ccp believed that there had to be a counter. Add to this that a mothership that is already immune to ew fits a cloak making it almost impossible to kill seems a bit extreme, but I realise that is the point of fitting a cloak on it, it is an expensive ship. ----------------------------------
Rafein Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:01:00 - [64] true but it takes time. not as much as it used to, but it still does. Also, what's to prevent you from just keeping moving the entire time, so even if you are detected, your gone before the enemy gang gets there. Probes are limited duration, only gotta outlast them.
Soriss	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:02:00 - [65] Originally by: Locke DieDrake If you are operating on someone elses turf (empire or 0.0, turf is turf, sov is different), then you should be at their mercy if they decide to come after you. It should be easy to probe out ships. And it should be much harder to probe out cloaked ships. But under no circumstances should it be possible for a hostile ship to safe spot and be SAFE. Interesting, turf is turf, however having a small mining POS there doesn't really make it turf. It would be interesting to have a nice BIG structure, that you can fit it in POS, for advanced scanning, or something. That would keep safe, the guys that really wanna be safe. And at the same time, prevent small pos's spammage all around eve. So the basic would be. You want SAFE in your space, well ... it costs.
Rawthorm Gallente The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:08:00 - [66] Originally by: Soriss Originally by: Locke DieDrake If you are operating on someone elses turf (empire or 0.0, turf is turf, sov is different), then you should be at their mercy if they decide to come after you. It should be easy to probe out ships. And it should be much harder to probe out cloaked ships. But under no circumstances should it be possible for a hostile ship to safe spot and be SAFE. Interesting, turf is turf, however having a small mining POS there doesn't really make it turf. It would be interesting to have a nice BIG structure, that you can fit it in POS, for advanced scanning, or something. That would keep safe, the guys that really wanna be safe. And at the same time, prevent small pos's spammage all around eve. So the basic would be. You want SAFE in your space, well ... it costs. See now there is an idea. A massive CPU intensive structure, a covert array if you like. Would let peoples covert ops in the same corp/alliance scan for cloaked ships in tandem with the array while its online in that system. That is an idea I could live with so long as its prohibitive enough that its only a viable option in big well used systems. The other idea is make it an independant structure. Can only have one in an outpost system and it can be assaulted directly.
Rafein Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:12:00 - [67] Only thing I would conceed is to base scan probes on Sig radius, so it finds huge things really fast, but takes longer to find smaller objects. would help covert op ships, and still be balanced.
The Enslaver Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.16 20:31:00 - [68] Originally by: Rawthorm Originally by: Soriss Originally by: Locke DieDrake If you are operating on someone elses turf (empire or 0.0, turf is turf, sov is different), then you should be at their mercy if they decide to come after you. It should be easy to probe out ships. And it should be much harder to probe out cloaked ships. But under no circumstances should it be possible for a hostile ship to safe spot and be SAFE. Interesting, turf is turf, however having a small mining POS there doesn't really make it turf. It would be interesting to have a nice BIG structure, that you can fit it in POS, for advanced scanning, or something. That would keep safe, the guys that really wanna be safe. And at the same time, prevent small pos's spammage all around eve. So the basic would be. You want SAFE in your space, well ... it costs. See now there is an idea. A massive CPU intensive structure, a covert array if you like. Would let peoples covert ops in the same corp/alliance scan for cloaked ships in tandem with the array while its online in that system. That is an idea I could live with so long as its prohibitive enough that its only a viable option in big well used systems. The other idea is make it an independant structure. Can only have one in an outpost system and it can be assaulted directly. For the ability to scan cloaked ships? Way too expensive to be viable. Which is probably your aim I'd go with a system to allow all alliance characters to warp to hostiles (except cloaked, which would use my previous suggestion) with a 1-2 minute time delay. If the hostiles stop moving, you can warp straight to them. Defenders need more direct bonuses in that form. Make it a POS module that sits outside of the forcefield with about 1m HP. -------- It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Rawthorm Gallente The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:00:00 - [69] Originally by: The Enslaver Originally by: Rawthorm Originally by: Soriss Originally by: Locke DieDrake If you are operating on someone elses turf (empire or 0.0, turf is turf, sov is different), then you should be at their mercy if they decide to come after you. It should be easy to probe out ships. And it should be much harder to probe out cloaked ships. But under no circumstances should it be possible for a hostile ship to safe spot and be SAFE. Interesting, turf is turf, however having a small mining POS there doesn't really make it turf. It would be interesting to have a nice BIG structure, that you can fit it in POS, for advanced scanning, or something. That would keep safe, the guys that really wanna be safe. And at the same time, prevent small pos's spammage all around eve. So the basic would be. You want SAFE in your space, well ... it costs. See now there is an idea. A massive CPU intensive structure, a covert array if you like. Would let peoples covert ops in the same corp/alliance scan for cloaked ships in tandem with the array while its online in that system. That is an idea I could live with so long as its prohibitive enough that its only a viable option in big well used systems. The other idea is make it an independant structure. Can only have one in an outpost system and it can be assaulted directly. For the ability to scan cloaked ships? Way too expensive to be viable. Which is probably your aim I'd go with a system to allow all alliance characters to warp to hostiles (except cloaked, which would use my previous suggestion) with a 1-2 minute time delay. If the hostiles stop moving, you can warp straight to them. Defenders need more direct bonuses in that form. Make it a POS module that sits outside of the forcefield with about 1m HP. Of course its my aim The point ultimatly here tho is that cloaked ships dont need to be and shouldnt be scannable, period. Its a dirty and cheap counter to an expensive and heavily penilized module.
The Enslaver Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:05:00 - [70] The price of T2 cloaks is artificial, and the price of any T2 item is irrelevant in balancing issues. The negatives are not severe, if they were you wouldn't use them on every ship, as you do now. Simply, non-coal specialist ships should not be able to remain unscannable. Period. -------- It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Davlin Lotze Raging Destruction	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:05:00 - [71] Originally by: Vizgoth Rawthorn, you talk as if AFK cloaking is a random occurance. It isnt and it happens everyday and in large ammounts in 0.0. I have seen 1-15 man blobs at least a couple times a week in 0.0 doing this. BoB, RA, GoonSwarm, Ka-TeT, AAA, just to name a few in the last month. BTW goonswarm does it the most Anyway, it is a bad problem and can shut down a whole region from mining/ ratting for hours and hours. Who wants to sits in a system in a gang looking for cloaked ships for hours knowing you will never be able to find them and they may be afk. That takes away the fun of the game for hundreds of players. IMO they should 1) kick people who have been idle for 45 min. (no it does not happen atm) 2) make cap use a lot heavier for non cov ops ships. Cov ops cant do much alone so it isnt so bad with them but, when you got an astarte and arazu cloaked in your system from down time to down time, even those 2 ships could pose a serious prob for any non cap ship. OH TEH HORRORZZZ!!!! Locked out of mining for hours!!!!! The apocalypse is close!
Davlin Lotze Raging Destruction	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:08:00 - [72] Originally by: Rafein TBH, it's the way Eve should be. Everything should have a counter, if you fit for it. Weapons Vs. tank, MWD vs. Webs, Tracking computer vs. Tracking disrupters. Sensor booster Vs Dampners., ect, ect, ect. Please let us know what the current counter to cloaking is on Tranq. All CCP is doing is allowing Probes, if you fit them, to be a counter to cloaking. Ah yes, but everything DOESNT have a counter sir. EW will remain the big "IWIN" it is now. Stabs are nerfed to keep the permajammed sucker right where he is. Where's the meaningful counter there? ECCM? riiiight.
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:10:00 - [73] Originally by: Rawthorm 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. I disagree, point 1 is pretty critical. We've had a guy in Dek for the last 2 weeks in 3 Force Recon ships camping station systems, and we more or less can't do a thing about it because he gets to dictate the terms of engagement. He'll attack someone, run off to his SS, and go do something for an hour and then come right back and do it again, all day long. Since we never know when he'll be back and he's using Force Recons, he has the ultimate element of surprise and gets to minimize whatever danger he's in. Clearly something needs to be changed so that he can't go AFK like this if we're to have any good chance of stopping him. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:15:00 - [74] Originally by: Aakron surely if you move, whilst cloaked, by the time they probe your location you've moved another 100km away? I'd say this could definitely be an issue. I've had the BE guys go AFK before in an Inty with the MWD locked open, of which we couldn't do anything about because with Gistii gear and Snake implants he was faster than anything we had and well out of the range of even snipers by the time we could probe out his current grid and get a covert ops ship there to let the gang warp to him. For cloaked BS's this won't be an issue, but it certainly is for ships that can use the covert ops cloak. They need to be able to move and I don't disagree, but if anything is done about AFK cloaking I don't want to see AFK-on-the-move cloaking to be the replacement. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Davlin Lotze Raging Destruction	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:18:00 - [75] To summarize: Rawthorn is right. The aim is to preserve diversity in combat and to make avenues available for original tactical thinkers to come up with ideas that do not begin and end with the blob mentality. If ones only aim is to make alliance X or Y's space more defendable then the logic of alot of these new scanning schemes becomes apparent. But for the life of me I cannot understand why alliances have to lower themselves to looking towards modify game mechanics to make their space safer\more defensible or what not. Why not instead outthink the opposition. Lay a trap and see if your trap is good enough to wrest the quarry from their safespot.
Gornax Garrul Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:40:00 - [76] There is the possibility that this change to cloaking being vulnerable to probing is a precursor to changes to Local. Currently, you know if a cloaked ship is in system mainly because the show up in Local and you can't scan them. If they are planning to change Local so that you only appear if you say something in that channel, then you would never know that a cloaked ship is in the system (making it pretty close to an "I win" button). However, if you make it so that a cloak signature shows up on a probe (but not on a scan), then the paranoid players have a counter. GG ** People like you make me want to access your brain and type "rm -rf /*"
Zak Kingsman A.W.M Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.11.16 21:44:00 - [77] Edited by: Zak Kingsman on 16/11/2006 21:46:49 Quote: Lets forget about argueing the finer details of cloaking for a second because you know mine and others views on it, but lets look at the progression here: Ship at object > find with scanner > ship goes to safe > use probes > ship fits cloak > ship is uncatchable but imobilized Now lets look at that this becomes in Kali: Ship at object > find with scanner > ship goes to safe > use probes > ship fits cloak > again use probes I dont know about you but probes seem to now be countering two things here. Where is the progression? You can find ships at safe w/out probes, so you can fix your progression there. Ship at object find with scanner fast > ship goes to safe > find with scanner slow/find with probes fast > ship fits cloak... nothing now you have ship at object find with scanner fast, ship goes to safe > find w/ scanner slow/find w/ probes fast > ship fits cloak find with probes maybe A cov-ops ship w/ appropriate cloak will still be next to immune as you can just start moving in a given direction and by the time anyone gets to your safespot you'll be safely away and still cloaked. Also the reports i've been getting is that ship size determines how accurate the scan may or may not be. So yeah you're cloaked mothership might have a problem but do you really think motherships should be running around completely immune to attack? For people fitting a cloak on a ship that's not designed for it, well then they're not as safe, but then again they're using a regular ship. Seems progression is fixed not broken w/ this. And you still have total immunity from scanners if you change positions constantly. This isn't going to change. Down with invincibility. I very much approve.
Karoth Tyu FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.16 22:43:00 - [78] Joy. So with cloaking effectively neutralized now, there'll be even more Control+Q and log-in traps. Hurray, just what the game needed
murder one Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.16 23:09:00 - [79] Originally by: Davlin Lotze To summarize: Rawthorn is right. The aim is to preserve diversity in combat and to make avenues available for original tactical thinkers to come up with ideas that do not begin and end with the blob mentality. If ones only aim is to make alliance X or Y's space more defendable then the logic of alot of these new scanning schemes becomes apparent. But for the life of me I cannot understand why alliances have to lower themselves to looking towards modify game mechanics to make their space safer\more defensible or what not. Why not instead outthink the opposition. Lay a trap and see if your trap is good enough to wrest the quarry from their safespot. Rawthorn is incorrect. Being invulnerable to attack is not good game design. If you're not AFK you can always move around and avoid being probed out. Cloaks, and specifically recons, allow you to choose the time and range of your engagement. This is already an incredably powerful tool. The current ability to be 100% impossible to find is unfair and unbalanced. Because I said so...
Hoshi DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.16 23:43:00 - [80] Originally by: Karoth Tyu Joy. So with cloaking effectively neutralized now, there'll be even more Control+Q and log-in traps. Hurray, just what the game needed Posted this earlier in the thread but seems none read it. On SiSi you can NOT I repeat NOT probe for cloaked ships. This might be a bug or it might be that CCP changed their mind since that blog was posted. What I am saying is it's a bit too early to scream that the sky is falling down.
JForce The Arrow Project The ARR0W Project	Posted - 2006.11.17 00:04:00 - [81] Originally by: Hoshi Originally by: Karoth Tyu Joy. So with cloaking effectively neutralized now, there'll be even more Control+Q and log-in traps. Hurray, just what the game needed Posted this earlier in the thread but seems none read it. On SiSi you can NOT I repeat NOT probe for cloaked ships. This might be a bug or it might be that CCP changed their mind since that blog was posted. What I am saying is it's a bit too early to scream that the sky is falling down. Can you elaborate? What happens when you try to probe for them? No results? How have you tested it?
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.17 00:09:00 - [82] And I thought us carebears are said to whine alot.. this is rich..
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.11.17 00:29:00 - [83] Originally by: The Enslaver Defenders need more direct bonuses in that form. Make it a POS module that sits outside of the forcefield with about 1m HP. Sure, if the defenders get a -99% hp modifier to balance their invulnrable safespots in their POS. Stop trying to make it impossible to attack without 10x the defenders numbers. That's all it is. Back on the more serious side, a big POS module would suit me... although a cloaked ship shiuld be warned of it, so they KNOW they're not safe (underspace ripples or whatever). It could even be a moderate cost one, if it had a cooldown. //Maya
BlackMoon Thrawn Minmatar eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.17 01:20:00 - [84] It's my understanding that there will be different scanners in kali, directional and probes. If cloaked ships could not be picked up on scanners and the minimum warp to distance on probes is 100k, would that be acceptable? You still get to use claoks for tactical advantages such as at a gate following haulers through. Defenders would have a chance to catch non-dedicated cloak ships and cov-ops etc could warp off if thier spot is busted. You can scan for probes and move your ship if they get close or stay cloaked and hope for the best. This solution requieres players to be at the keyboard if they want to ensure survival and allows virtual invulnerability to cov-ops as intended.
Ekscalybur	Posted - 2006.11.17 01:38:00 - [85] An easy way to fix this problem is to make the cloaking dynamics in Eve more like the cat and mouse game that characterizes submarine warfare. Submarines are in effect cloaked under their normal operating procedures, finding one requires you either have a very good idea of its general location and heading, or actively trying to 'ping' it out. An active search would be just like scan probing, and should have a reasonably high chance of outing the cloaked ship. Just like with submarines though, once you 'ping' the scan probes, the cloaked ship knows exactly where you are, what type of probe you're using (which should point to what type of ship is dropping them), and that should give the cloaked pilot a decent chance to avoid your scan. It should require his attention to do so, but it shouldn't be difficult. This would mean that afk cloakers are very easily and quickly scanned out, and cloakers that are attentive can go about remaining that way. Its win-win too, even if the cloaker remains cloaked and the pursuer hasn't revealed him, you have effectively changed his priorities and gotten him to drop what it was you wanted him to drop so he could focus on remaining undiscovered. This way, a handful of people can't lock down an entire fleet, it would only take a handful of people to otherwise occupy the cloakers. Cloakers wouldn't have an i-win button, nor would their module be made ineffective. Dropping scan probes should set off alarms on cloak fitted ships. Give covops ships the ability to drop a special jetcan (with a very short lifespan, lol) that acts as a countermeasure/decoy and they are again made more effective at the stealth game than any other ship.
DeMundus The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2006.11.17 01:44:00 - [86] I agree with my corp m8 here, we have talked about it alot. BUT there is another thing thats gonna ruin guerilla warfare - and make pirates look bad... the HP increase. It will take alot longer to kill a BS or any other ship - we will see more ppl runing back to the gate, we will have bigger problem getting into populated 0.0 and taking a target down fast - b4 backup arrive... /DeM Abandon all hope But take care of teh cake!11 - Immy
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa	Posted - 2006.11.17 01:46:00 - [87] One such counter would be flares, beacons fitted much like probes and dropped in systems with varied signatures, resembling that of frigates to motherships depending on the cost of the flare and skill of the decoy pilot. Something's rotten with the state of the servers.
Dao 2 Generals Of Destruction Syndicate Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.17 02:00:00 - [88] Wow I didn't know they were gonna do this, I think its a horrible idea and completely ruins the purpose of the cloak. I agree with the previously noted person, let it tell you if theres one with your scanning range, but not let you go to it and not tell you what shiptype. ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Davlin Lotze Raging Destruction	Posted - 2006.11.17 03:00:00 - [89] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Davlin Lotze To summarize: Rawthorn is right. The aim is to preserve diversity in combat and to make avenues available for original tactical thinkers to come up with ideas that do not begin and end with the blob mentality. If ones only aim is to make alliance X or Y's space more defendable then the logic of alot of these new scanning schemes becomes apparent. But for the life of me I cannot understand why alliances have to lower themselves to looking towards modify game mechanics to make their space safer\more defensible or what not. Why not instead outthink the opposition. Lay a trap and see if your trap is good enough to wrest the quarry from their safespot. Rawthorn is incorrect. Being invulnerable to attack is not good game design. If you're not AFK you can always move around and avoid being probed out. Cloaks, and specifically recons, allow you to choose the time and range of your engagement. This is already an incredably powerful tool. The current ability to be 100% impossible to find is unfair and unbalanced. Didnt you really mean to say "being invulnerable to attack is not good game design"....from the vantage point of a an entity that lives and breaths and depends on being able to blob all that opposes it into submission? Or, are you arguing that ALL CLOAKED SHIPS SHOULD BE ABLE TO WARP WHILST CLOAKED???? You have to make that concession is seems to me to sustain your position. TBH, this is just another case of large alliances and entities wanting to "have it both ways."
Herring Pimpology Pimpology in Mining Player	Posted - 2006.11.17 03:26:00 - [90] Originally by: Vizgoth Rawthorn, you talk as if AFK cloaking is a random occurance. It isnt and it happens everyday and in large ammounts in 0.0. I have seen 1-15 man blobs at least a couple times a week in 0.0 doing this. BoB, RA, GoonSwarm, Ka-TeT, AAA, just to name a few in the last month. BTW goonswarm does it the most Anyway, it is a bad problem and can shut down a whole region from mining/ ratting for hours and hours. Who wants to sits in a system in a gang looking for cloaked ships for hours knowing you will never be able to find them and they may be afk. That takes away the fun of the game for hundreds of players. IMO they should 1) kick people who have been idle for 45 min. (no it does not happen atm) 2) make cap use a lot heavier for non cov ops ships. Cov ops cant do much alone so it isnt so bad with them but, when you got an astarte and arazu cloaked in your system from down time to down time, even those 2 ships could pose a serious prob for any non cap ship. Here here. And while they're at it make cloaking devices use a highslot - make the afk cloakers pay for the ability to remain unfound in dps, when they do gank someone. Wishing for better mining ships in a system near you.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.