EVE Search - Hiding in Eve- Why We Cloak

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Hiding in Eve- Why We Cloak

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS 29	Posted - 2011.12.18 08:28:00 - [1] - Quote I was trying to come up with an elegant way to tie together many difference concepts in a nice smoothly delivered analogy that would be easily understood by the general Eve population. But that takes effort, and I'm lazy. So this is what you get instead: Key points: Space essentially has no "terrain features" to hide behind, particularly with respect to it's incarnation in the Eve Universe. Eve provides nearly perfect information intelligence that can't be avoided or spoofed to hide one's existence (Local channel, ship/system scanner, probes, galactic map info). The only counter Eve provides to any of this is a purely binary solution (on or off, no in-between) and it's only capable of hiding one's immediate location, and only on a system-wide level: the cloak. Everyone is still able to determine a player's location down to a system level of precision, even if they are cloaked. Don't even think of bringing up W-Space. That's completely outside the scope of this issue. With good game design players should never be handed anything for free. Large rewards need a large amount of effort. Information about a player's location is a large reward. It should require a large amount of effort. Players currently complain about the lack of ability to carve out a small niche of space to call their own without belonging to a major Alliance or Coalition. The reason this doesn't currently work is because players are too easily tracked down and precisely located. It's simply impossible to exist somewhere and not be found. An important bit here: EVE NEEDS "SPACE TERRAIN" ON A SYSTEM AND GALACTIC LEVEL that will allow players to mask and hide their presence. There are two key areas here: Strategic and Tactical location information. I'll start with Tactical: Tactical location information should be gained through sensors and sensors only (no, Local isn't a sensor). Sensors come in two flavors: active and passive. The advantage of passive sensors: always on, doesn't give away your position. Disadvantages: short ranged, imprecise, doesn't reveal a lot of info ("hey, there's a ship out there!" not "hey, there's a ship out there and it's W type and at XYZ location!"). Active sensors have much greater range, greater precision and provide detailed information about any contacts. The disadvantage here is that you broadcast your presence to everyone within range of the active sensors. Information should be range dependent: in order to get precise info, you need to get close. Yes, there's a group of ships at 20AU, at 10AU you can discern that it's 12 individual ships, at 5AU you can tell that it's 5 cruisers, 2 BCs and 5 BS. At 2AU you can tell what class each ship is. When you're on grid you can tell who's flying which ship. The more powerful and/or specialized the sensors are, the greater the detail you get at longer ranges. Each race of ships should have their own trace signatures that sensors can be tuned or specialized in. THE GAME DESIGN OF GAINING PLAYER SHIP INFORMATION AND CORRECTLY INTERPRETING IT SHOULD BE HIGHLY DEPENDENT UPON PLAYER SKILL AND INTERACTION. Highly skilled and specialized recon pilots should be of extreme value. Players should be given new modules and rigs to build and customize sensor packages as they see fit in order to tailor them to their play styles. Defensive players (miners, mission runners etc.) will want powerful passive sensors to enable an "always on" long range omni-directional warning system that will alert them to incoming ships, regardless of type. Offensive players (PVPers, who else?) will want highly tuned directional sensors that will enable them to find prey at extreme range and identify targets with a high degree of detail as quickly as possible. Players should also be given modules/rigs to decrease their sensor signature to various types of sensors (stealth rigs, if you will) that will allow players to adapt to their prey. Note that all of the above isn't binary. It's not ON/OFF- detected or not detected. There are multiple highly granular levels of information between detecting something and clearly identifying it as a threat. I could go on for pages in detail about how to implement these ideas, but let's leave it here for now. We can expand on this later. Strategic location information- hiding among the stars: Just like tactical information, strategic info needs to have many levels of detail and precision and be delivered through both active and passive sensors. System bodies (planets, moons, asteroids, stars) should provide "terrain" with which to mask players, stations and their activities. The larger the mass, the larger and more intense the gravity well within which to hide ships and outposts etc. Asteroid belts would provide "backscatter", gas clouds and nebulae would provide opaque scan-proof environments in which to hide. A "stellar forest" if you will. The equivalent of hiding in the trees. Corporations and Alliances would get the ability to install massive sensor installations that would provide real time active and passive information from a system to regional level, with varying degrees of detail and accuracy. At no point would these static sensor nets deliver information as accurately or as quickly as ship sensors would. Strategic signatures would accrue over days and weeks and months of player ship activity. The more activity and the greater number of ships and/or tonnage of said ships would generate increasingly more intense signatures. Small groups of players in small ships tucked away in quiet corners of space in the shadow of massive stars and planets or hidden away in giant gas nebulae would go unnoticed for weeks, months or maybe years. Massive groups of highly active players would create so much "space pollution" that it would be sensed light years away, across multiple regions. You would literally be able to smell the stink of your enemy. [more to come] I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS 29	Posted - 2011.12.18 08:37:00 - [2] - Quote [continued] Currently, there's no advantage to being a small group. With the above concepts there will now be a very good reason to bring only what you need, or even possibly less than you would optimally require. Currently, Eve's game design only rewards the biggest and most numerous. CCP needs to build in more game design that rewards a player who is smarter than the rest and attempts to be as asymmetric as possible and do more with less. Once small groups or even solo players are able to exist and survive in 0.0 by keeping their existence hidden from other players I think we will see a large number of players migrating to 0.0 to give it a go. I think that the current perception by most players who aren't currently in 0.0 is "I can't survive without massive numbers, so why try?" I think that's a valid question. Once you're found, the enemy descends upon you with superior numbers and you're dead. The main problem here is the perfection and precision of location information and the ease with which it is required, and the fact that CCP rewards numbers superiority above all else in the game. The blob is the fault of CCP, pure and simple. I'm looking forward to your comments. Let's try and keep them constructive and focused please. I know you can do it. I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 20	Posted - 2011.12.18 08:47:00 - [3] - Quote I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver?
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS 34	Posted - 2011.12.18 09:55:00 - [4] - Quote Xorv wrote: I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver? How to do it in a nutshell: 1. Put Local in Delayed Mode. 2. Tactical Location Information: Extensively modify the scanning system and build in passive/active modes, adding in rigs/modules to optimize for each. Additionally, factor in racial sensors, racial emissions (ship exhaust, emissions etc.) and various third and fourth order complexity to give evasion and detection a subtle and nuanced feel with an extreme amount of depth built into the game design. 3. Strategic Location Information: Similar to Tactical, build in the player produced/operated equipment that replaces the current "free" information streams and data sets. Strategic Location Information can be propagated through player groups via standings. The mechanics for what I'm proposing should be viable with the existing code base. We already have variables like sig radius and sensor strength. We already have omni-directional and hyper-directional scanning capability. Now all we need to do is break the existing scanner mechanics into separate portions, add more detail to each and make it highly customizable and tunable by the players. Everything that I've thought of so far is based on existing game design/game mechanics. More specifics: I'll start with the most simple portion of the whole thing, the passive sensors. All ships will have passive sensors. This will be the default sensor mode. All ships will have more/less effective base passive sensors depending on ship type and race. Some will have greater range, others faster refresh frequency (5 seconds vs. 10 as an example) while others provide more detail at greater range etc. Passive sensors will be upgradable with both rigs and modules, and all sensors will be able to be tuned to detect a particular racial type of ship at the expense of detecting other types of ships with less capability. Ships will also be able to equip mods/rigs that will make them harder (or impossible) to detect with passive sensors and/or tuned to be particularly invisible to racial sensor types etc. Giving players the option to configure their ships for a specific threat at the cost of making them more vulnerable to others is good game design. The larger/hotter the ship signature, the easier it will be detected: it will be detected at greater range and with more detail than other ships. No longer will a cloak be a 'one size fits all' solution, making a BS invisible just as easily as a frig. Example: BS will be detectable from extreme range compared to a frig. As ships come closer to one another more info about the contact will be revealed depending on the power of the sensors and the type of target. Depending on the proximity of the contact with other ships and the size of those ships, multiple ships might appear as one large ship, or a large ship might mask the presence of smaller ships in its group. The closer you are, the more powerful your sensors and the less stealthy your target is, the more info you discern at a given range. The concept with passive sensors is that they operate on the idea that they detect emissions by other ships: exhaust gas, heat, communications signals or what have you. The louder/brighter/smellier your ship is, the easier it will be to detect. The automated nature of the passive scanner alleviates the issue of "always having to push the button" every 2 seconds. It's the equivalent of "watching local". It's imperfect information however is what gives attacking players a chance to locate other players and get within range before they can run. Which brings me to Active Sensors. Active Sensors: These can be separated into a further two groups: ship mounted and probes. Both systems will emit a "ping" which can be detected by targeted ships that are hit with this sensor ping. Targeted ships won't always be able to detect your pings if your active sensors are sufficiently advanced and you're operating far outside of the defending player's passive sensors. Active sensors are the equivalent of shining a flashlight into a dark room. You can see what the flashlight is pointed at, and your target can see the flashlight, but nobody else can see the light beam unless they're being painted by it. Probes are comparable to an illumination round. You fire one up in the air and it lights up the entire battlefield, showing everyone where everyone else is all at once, friend and foe alike. This is a generalization and of course CCP should build in immense detail into this with respect to type of probe, race of probe, range, power, duration, pulse frequency, probe arrays and coverage, probe overlap and constructive interference of sensor volume etc. Strategic sensors: These are both active and passive as well. They will be Corporation and Alliance level assets. The more accurate and timely the information the more expensive it will be. At an exponential rate. The game needs analogues to every modern sensor type: surveillance satellites, early warning radars, missile launch detection etc. Not literally mind you, but figuratively. What should never happen: big Alliances "getting local back" with some static sensor add-on to an outpost. At the most the information should be similar to "average number of ships in system in the last 24/12/6/4 hours, depending on the level of sensor (more granular/shorter time slice = better). [more later] I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS 35	Posted - 2011.12.18 10:19:00 - [5] - Quote The concept of ship stealth and detection: incorporating it into every module, every choice! Imagine if different types of shield extenders increased your ship's signature across various different racial emissions spectrums. The same for various microwarp drives or afterburners. What if different types of armor plates provided lower signatures due to better signal absorption, at the expense of not providing as much EHP? What if passive shield/armor hardeners provided lower emissions spectrum than active did? What if using special (Tech 3?) ammo in your guns caused zero increase to your sig (silenced weapons anyone?), allowing you to quickly and quietly make a kill before anyone knows you're in the area? On earth, not every ship is a submarine, but every submarine is a ship. In Eve, EVERY ship is a submarine. Some are just more stealthy than others. Dedicated Covert Ops and Recon class ships will have exceptional sensor suites and ultra low emissions in addition to active cloaking capabilities. I would recommend that these active cloaking abilities be of limited duration and require cap/fuel to use, similar to how diesel/electric submarines used to operate. You can "go dark" to sneak up on a target and then attack, but you'll eventually need to "surface" and refresh your air/recharge your batteries so to speak. All other ships simply wouldn't be allowed to cloak. Non Covert Ops cloaks would be replaced with "stealth modules" that would reduce a ship's signature, but wouldn't render it completely invisible/impossible to find like cloaks currently do. There should be trade offs that would make currently "worthless" modules attractive: do you go for the best fitting, best performance, best efficiency or lowest sensor signature/emissions? Incorporating various sensor emissions capabilities into named modules seems like a good way to differentiate them, mitigating the "bigger is always better" game design that currently exists. Sensor networking: In addition to information, sharing it is just as important. Where Corps and Alliances will really benefit is in the sharing of information. If you're in a gang and you have a CovOps pilot with you, what if everything his sensors detected showed up on your tactical overlay? Now he truly is your eyes and ears for your whole gang! What if your ships could fire their weapons at targets he acquired, even though the targets are out of your lock range (but not weapons range)? Indirect fire, so to speak! What if you're two systems away but an enemy blob arrives and your Alliance has regional and local static sensors installed in that system? You're able to look on the map and notice increased activity two systems over in the past 4 hours and are able to pack up your mining op in time to make it to safety. Unfortunately, the next day the enemy comes back in smaller ships and in fewer numbers and splits up into three different groups, arriving from three separate directions. Unable to detect the smaller ships in fewer numbers from long range, your sensors don't notify you until it's too late and you lose half your mining crew to the invaders. The inability to manage large amounts of information will inherently limit the size and scope of space that a single Alliance/entity can effectively police and control. This is another positive byproduct of this concept: it will be very costly in TIME to control a lot of space. People will tend to settle on a reasonable and practical amount of space to control and stick with that. Controlling large swaths of space for little or no need will go away as it won't be cost effective to do so from a time standpoint. Thoughts? I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.
Eyup Mi'duck Republic University Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2011.12.18 10:22:00 - [6] - Quote TL;DR But to answer your question, I cloak to become less visible as a target. I am me.-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á I am not you.-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áI am happy with this situation.
Lexmana Imperial Stout 102	Posted - 2011.12.18 10:50:00 - [7] - Quote You know, it like your ideas alot. This is very close to what I envisioned EVE would be before actually trying the game out. I especially like how this would provide the basis for terrain in space and provide many more tactical options to fleet commanders (small fleets may actually become an advantage in many situations) and individual pilots. The scanning system, local and cloaking mechanics is in dire need of a big overhaul. OP is a very good starting point. +1
Jask Avan Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2011.12.18 11:16:00 - [8] - Quote +1 Information should be a skill, not handed to everyone on a silver platter.
Thebriwan LUX Uls Xystus 13	Posted - 2011.12.18 11:33:00 - [9] - Quote I like these ideas very much. You should consider posting them in the ideas section
Seleia O'Sinnor Arklight Project Fade 2 Black 82	Posted - 2011.12.18 11:38:00 - [10] - Quote +1000 This is well written and is sound in logic. I support this completely!. Thanks for a highly valuable thread. Eve community: An angry mob of bright people hunting witches, more torches, more hay forks, growing and growing.

GreGh Rakrot Rionnag Alba Northern Coalition. 2	Posted - 2011.12.18 11:39:00 - [11] - Quote I like it, alot. Its basicly how I envisioned space exploration game would be like, feeling of vast and unknown space. You get that feeling wheh you start playing EVE but as you learn the basic intel gathering tools (local chat and ship scanner) the feeling quickly vanishes, this would be alot more challenging and fun. Kind of similar to spaceship technology in Sci-Fi book series Vatta's War, where the tactical positioning and ability to communicate between ships in real time would greatly influence the space battles. Sadly I doubt CCP would be bold enough to make such drastic changes to the game, one can only hope.
Dr Karsun Coffee Lovers Brewing Club Care Factor 39	Posted - 2011.12.18 12:00:00 - [12] - Quote I disagree. This information of someones presence is for free, sure, but it's not precise information. The enemy can be, in some systems, more than a hundred AU away, I wouldn't really call that precise information. I would gladly trade all kinds of local for removal of cloaks. I don't need to know that you'r in my system as long as I can scan your ass down with combat probes. As long as cloaks are the only thing that doesn't have a counter - I see no reason to remove local. "Have you had your morning coffee?" -> the Coffee Lovers Brewing Club is recruiting! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=363976#post363976
Sarion Stormweaver Spectrum Solutions INC 1	Posted - 2011.12.18 14:49:00 - [13] - Quote +1 nice idea. One thing though. How do you make the change ? :) Because these are huge game mechanics changes. And switching overnight from one system to another is gonna **** off a lot of people.
Apollo Gabriel Mercatoris Etherium Cartel 349	Posted - 2011.12.18 14:54:00 - [14] - Quote I'd leave w-space for this I'm a ***** profanity filter that can catch and ***, but fuckin little else. -á
J Kunjeh 81	Posted - 2011.12.18 15:36:00 - [15] - Quote OP has some really good ideas in it. I hope this discussion continues and some of these get implemented down the road. "The world as we know it came about through an anomaly (anomou)" (The Gospel of Philip, 1-5)-á
Vin Lieger Ambiguous Holdings inc. 1	Posted - 2011.12.18 15:42:00 - [16] - Quote Love it I imagine a day when you can hide swarms of frigs/cruisers etc behind titans and other caps for a while, kind of like hiding your true fleet size across battlefields
Lexmana Imperial Stout 104	Posted - 2011.12.18 15:48:00 - [17] - Quote Sarion Stormweaver wrote: +1 nice idea. One thing though. How do you make the change ? :) Because these are huge game mechanics changes. And switching overnight from one system to another is gonna **** off a lot of people. I am not so sure it is such a huge change. Most mechanics already exist in dscan today. Just apply different range/vector limitations and update intervals depending on ship/modules/rigs. That would cover most passive and active scanning mechanics. What needs to be added is mechanics to hide behind space objects/celestials and such. As for upsetting people - most players in null and low knows how to adapt and would probably be very happy with such change. Highsecbears are another thing, but local could stay as is in highsec so no prob there. And since they don't use dscan much they would not see much of a change.
bartos100 DARK ADAMA Rolling Thunder. 1	Posted - 2011.12.18 15:50:00 - [18] - Quote i like the idea not realy any comments besides that :)
Aqriue Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 199	Posted - 2011.12.18 15:57:00 - [19] - Quote So as to completly trash this nice thread idea which should be in Suggestions Jump gates You can hide behind a jump gate, because you can never see whats on the other side until you go through it. Jump gates are the limiting factor and implimented for the exact opposite reason OP is describing to make space "spacey", jump gates "chokepoint" players into conflict otherwise you just avoid people. Which would chase away all the hardcore PVPers. Unless CCP does a MAJOR OVERHAUL of EVE (pfft, yeah right) and changes huge aspects its pointless to even suggest it adding space to space.
Torin Corax Zebra Corp 13	Posted - 2011.12.18 16:14:00 - [20] - Quote Very nice ideas. I dare say this would be a huge shake-up, and no doubt cause endless whine threads. That said something along these lines is long overdue imho. With proper balancing (and this would not be an overnight success I'm sure) this would be fair to both hunters and hunted. If I had an inappropriate signature, it would be removed from here By. Spitfire

Lexmana Imperial Stout 104	Posted - 2011.12.18 16:20:00 - [21] - Quote Aqriue wrote: So as to completly trash this nice thread idea which should be in Suggestions Jump gates You can hide behind a jump gate, because you can never see whats on the other side until you go through it. Jump gates are the limiting factor and implimented for the exact opposite reason OP is describing to make space "spacey", jump gates "chokepoint" players into conflict otherwise you just avoid people. Which would chase away all the hardcore PVPers. Unless CCP does a MAJOR OVERHAUL of EVE (pfft, yeah right) and changes huge aspects its pointless to even suggest it adding space to space. So you are trying to be smart but all you can say is there is one place to hide right now and that it is enough? And i bet you, jump gates wasn't put there for the reasons you state. I am pretty sure jump gates was put into EVE as a means to divide this single shard MMO universe into smaller pieces so that computers could have a chance handle the load. Becoming a choke was a nice side benefit. I do agree with you though, that this thread has a place in ideas/suggestions.
Mag's the united Negative Ten. 3203	Posted - 2011.12.18 16:22:00 - [22] - Quote There are some good ideas in there, but I disagree with some. This should be in F & I though tbh. CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Valei Khurelem Viziam Amarr Empire 18	Posted - 2011.12.18 16:23:00 - [23] - Quote I posted a suggestion awhile back about no local and I think that you should have a command and conquer style radar installation in the 0.0 systems in order for the owners to enable it or use local if it's destroyed you should be able to have any number of ships sneaking into the system without them knowing. The current local system is massively easy to abuse, this is why it's so easy to get gate camps set up, this is why it's easy for blob fleets etc. to avoid each other and never have a conflict. Information is power and CCP have handed it to everyone on a platter.
Myrkala Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition. 2	Posted - 2011.12.18 18:59:00 - [24] - Quote Omg, the forum still eats up posts? :( I wrote about 4k chars worth of brainstorming considering your idea, as well as other gameplay factors you missed like tactical evasive maneuvers enabled by the cloak in the form it is today. (Avoiding getting killed in camps ect.) Main points were: The cloaking device with fuel/cap consumption and a fixed activation timer, all of these could be effected by low and mid slot modules. As well as not being able to cloak indefinitely, because of fuel/cap consumption. And alertness required by the pilot because running out of fuel/cap while AFK cloaking usually ends up in your ship getting blown up. Ship size vs sacrifice considerations, also looked at capitals. And then looked at the tactical aspect of the system scanner structures on a group/corp/alliance level, and how it increases value of intel because its harder or requires more effort to come by. Which I like. As well as how the feel of the game changes when no one is really safe, because of no immediate local and also that having some weak signal on scan might mean there is an anomaly, a wreck, or a hostile ship present in the vicinity. What must found is a good balance between: Hard to find targets, easy to find targets. Hard vs easy to catch targets and hard vs easy to evade being caught. Ultimately these things should be about being smart, alert and ready to grab someone or gtfo.
Mors Sanctitatis Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS 61	Posted - 2011.12.18 18:59:00 - [25] - Quote To answer many of your posts, in no particular order: Yes, technically, it should be in F&I. IMO F&I gets little or no attention by the general forum public and hence I posted in GD. Even though I'd prefer the post remain in GD, I'm sure it will get moved to F&I to die among all the other forgotten posts there. Thank you for all the positive feedback! Jumpgates as chokepoints- "back in the day".... there were no jumpgates- players always warped into the system at the star. There was one way in. Jumpgates were added so that there were multiple locations to arrive at. Quick jump mechanic I just thought of while writing this: what if Jump gates allow you to travel without using fuel? What if you could "lock on" to any celestial body, provided it was large enough and jump to that instead, with varying degrees of accuracy, only you would have to consume isotopes like carriers currently do? You could have a choice of using jump gates for the ease of use and convenience, or jump into a system and land at the star, a planet, or even a moon if your "navigational sensors" were sufficiently advanced (read: RIGS AND MODULES) and able to lock on to such a small mass. Skills could be implemented to improve navigational accuracy, fuel use etc. There could always be a chance of failure and you'd end up in a nearby system. Fleet jumps could scatter a 100 man fleet with 10-20% landing in the middle of a system, 5-10AU away from the intended celestial object, or even in another system if the navigation was poor enough. Heck, imagine being able to hit "JUMP" at any time during the align process! As the accuracy of the jump increases, you could call "good enough" once it's at 90% and hit jump in order to shave a few precious seconds off of your align time to escape harm. Clearly there would be a threshold for alignment so that you can't hit jump instantly in order to avoid death. In the last few seconds of a normal align cycle the accuracy would go from 0-100%, giving the player the choice when trying to run or trying to catch another player the option to gamble with their chance of arriving slightly sooner at the expense of accuracy. We could build powerful navigation systems into Command Ships (OH HO, look, a real role for them!...) that would be able to quickly and accurately navigate large gangs of players to arrive all at the same place, at the same time, with less fuel cost. Again, just brainstorming here. Believe it or not, Eve needs more complexity and more layers to peel back when it comes to PVP and combat, and adding additional complexity to information warfare and navigation is a great way to start without changing the existing offense/defense mechanics of actual combat. All of these ideas don't require too much in the way of art. Most are purely game design changes. I can't think of anything that I'm proposing right now that isn't already in the game. The TL; DR of the above concept is as basic as proposing sub-capital ships be able to use celestial objects as pseudo cyno beacons to jump to, and building in accuracy errors when arriving. Should be pretty simple. As for precedent: what do you think happens when Black Ops ships bridge in a bomber gang onto a Covert Cyno? Same concept, more flexibility. Again, bring on the discussion! I'd like to hear your ideas! I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.
Karth Mentis Aliastra Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2011.12.18 19:40:00 - [26] - Quote You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist. What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool.
Alara IonStorm 646	Posted - 2011.12.18 19:47:00 - [27] - Quote OP's a talker. good thing I like what he is saying.
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 314	Posted - 2011.12.18 19:52:00 - [28] - Quote I cloak because I can. I cloak because there are people who have nothing better to do than pad their all-worshipful killboards. I cloak because the RMT'ers hate it when they can't find the person who made their bots dock up. I cloak because everybody is like Jan Brady when you appear in "their" space and watching their semi-autistic emorage when they can't get their kill is fun. I cloak because all exit gates being bubbled while someone is cursing at you in Russian means they probably brought combat probes too. I cloak because it was also cool when the Klingons and Romulans did it.
Derus Grobb Iron Oxide Institute 6	Posted - 2011.12.18 20:03:00 - [29] - Quote New intel tools should be in the next expansion. This would be a great overhaul to the staid mechanics of watching local.
Jask Avan Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2011.12.18 21:00:00 - [30] - Quote Karth Mentis wrote: You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist. What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool. Interesting, but can be circumvented with out-of-game tools.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: 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.