| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Joahanas Stone
Caldari
Confederation of Red Moon
   |
Posted - 2007.03.09 20:16:00 -
[1]
I was wondering if anyone has come up with any ideas in hunting down cloaked ships. If there is anything in the game that ****es me off more than a cloaked AFK alta left in a system to annoy the crap out of people, I can not think of it. Maybe the DEV's could come up with a speciallized scan prob to help locate cloaked ships, like warp within 15k. then a group can just run around poping smart bombs in hopes of uncloaking them. This would also not nerf the specialized covert ops, they would just be able to stay cloaked and warp away. the ships not ment for cloaks would end up uncloaking to run, or sweating as ships looked for them. On the flip side, might actually make smart bombs more usefull. To me, the cloak just seems a little too untouchable. No one should be perfectly safe floating AFK anywhere in 0.0 
|
LoKesh
Amarr
SH Brotherhood
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.03.09 20:37:00 -
[2]
I do agree that there should be a way to hunt down people who stay AFK at a safespot while cloaked. Hunting down anyone just temporarily cloaked, maybe not.
Perhaps a probe that could detect cloaked ships, but that had a huge cycle time? 45 minute base or more.
|
Joahanas Stone
Caldari
Confederation of Red Moon
|
Posted - 2007.03.09 20:50:00 -
[3]
My thoughts for this are not pointed towards the people that are actively using cloaks. But just having something that can be mounted to give a slightly inaccurate location. for instance. cloak ship watching gate camp or station. The prob would give a location approx 10 to 20k from possible location. ships that can not fly well cloaked might be in some trouble, ships that can fly at normal rate would easily be able to warp off or motor away from searching group. therefore, if you are paying attention being the cloaked ship, you can work around and re position your self. If you are sitting at Burgerking, well... you might loose a ship.
|
Christopher Dalran
Gallente
Deadly Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.09 21:09:00 -
[4]
Get a bunch of ships to spread out over a reasonably large area (spread in all 3 dimensions, not just 2) and have them all launch light drones. Have each pilot at random tell their drones to attack different targets (each person should have each of their 5 drones attack different targets) and continually do this to create a fluid drone net that will probably decloak anyone that just so happens to be in the middle of all their flight paths (or warps in there).
-------------------------------
C.D's Formula for success
-------------------------------
Credit Card = Game Time Card
Gametime Card = ISK
Therefore Credit Card = ISK.
|
Joahanas Stone
Caldari
Confederation of Red Moon
|
Posted - 2007.03.09 22:21:00 -
[5]
cool, good idea. I also found this while looking through the scanning sticky
Cloaked ships
At the time of writing it is NOT possible to probe for cloaked ships. A dev said in a blog it would be possible to probe for them but it seems they either changed their mind, forgot about it or haven't got it to work yet.
Sounds like it is viable in the future.
|
Xerrik
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.10 22:46:00 -
[6]
For me trying to find a cloaked ship would be like a desroyer trying to find a submarine in World War 2 era where you got a "rough" idea and had to use depth charges to try to "hit" it.
Heck it'd make a good use for destroyers again wouldn't you think? I like the idea of an inaccurate scanner but why stop there? maybe add in "sonar" probes? all these would have to be used to try and determine the general area of where a cloaked ship might be. If the ship is afk it'd be easier to locate while an active ship would be both on the move and able to try and evade with a fairly good sucess rate (still).
In a brief summary:
1.) inaccurate "radar/sonar scanner" with or without probes designed to find cloaked ships.
2.) add a new destroyer or add the feature into the old one for better resolution/ faster scan times vs cloaked ships
They say you can't do it...
But that doesn't always work. |
Decrepus
Raiders of the Lost Cans
|
Posted - 2007.03.10 23:06:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Xerrik
For me trying to find a cloaked ship would be like a desroyer trying to find a submarine in World War 2 era where you got a "rough" idea and had to use depth charges to try to "hit" it.
Heck it'd make a good use for destroyers again wouldn't you think? I like the idea of an inaccurate scanner but why stop there? maybe add in "sonar" probes? all these would have to be used to try and determine the general area of where a cloaked ship might be. If the ship is afk it'd be easier to locate while an active ship would be both on the move and able to try and evade with a fairly good sucess rate (still).
In a brief summary:
1.) inaccurate "radar/sonar scanner" with or without probes designed to find cloaked ships.
2.) add a new destroyer or add the feature into the old one for better resolution/ faster scan times vs cloaked ships
Agreed! I had the same idea in my head (as opposed to making it a salvager ships like the other smackards).
I would also say NOS resistance/immunity but no one would probably agree with me lol
|
Crusix Bargoth
Amarr
Meridian Dynamics
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 01:34:00 -
[8]
-One high slot item that sends out 100km pulses every 10 second cycle, these pulses pull them OUT of cloak.
If its an active pilot he just re-cloaks and warps off if detected at range, in-active...motor up and pop him.
-A new probe that does the SAME thing while flying around, just pulls them out and goes "OMGZ YOU FOUND A SHIP D00D!" any recon pilot worth their salt is gone before you get there, thats their place, get in, recon, get out.
-Destroyers and interdictors get a 99% CPU or PG reduction like most other speciallty mods.
The thing is to have it pulse at such a long range that they will pop up on over view, but still have enough time to get out if they're quality pilots.
We need a mod that lets us FIND them, not insta WTFPWN them.
And drone netting isn't the solution, its an annoying way to maybe do something.
Just a thought.
Originally by: Kaathar Rielspar
nerf ponies!!1one
|
Kolwrath
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 02:14:00 -
[9]
Please Read this Thread about this issue and stop whining about a player not even playing you tin foil hat poster boy.
|
FuzzBuzz
Caldari
Templars of Space
CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 02:50:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Crusix Bargoth
-One high slot item that sends out 100km pulses every 10 second cycle, these pulses pull them OUT of cloak.
If its an active pilot he just re-cloaks and warps off if detected at range, in-active...motor up and pop him.
-A new probe that does the SAME thing while flying around, just pulls them out and goes "OMGZ YOU FOUND A SHIP D00D!" any recon pilot worth their salt is gone before you get there, thats their place, get in, recon, get out.
-Destroyers and interdictors get a 99% CPU or PG reduction like most other speciallty mods.
The thing is to have it pulse at such a long range that they will pop up on over view, but still have enough time to get out if they're quality pilots.
We need a mod that lets us FIND them, not insta WTFPWN them.
And drone netting isn't the solution, its an annoying way to maybe do something.
Just a thought.
ohh gimp a class of ship to unusefulness?
some of you need to get a clue. why not ask for cloaks to be gone from the game.
these are paper thin ships and your fracking scared of them, they cant do much damage to a alert pilot. unless there in gangs.
here is a tip, lock a cloaked ship and it cant cloak
2. stealth bombers have to wait for there missiles to hit before they can cloak again, thats if they want to actually do some damage.
give covert op ships the abilty to use prototype cloak AND warp then some of your silly ideas can be justified but not when paying 75m for a cloak on a ship that will die in one volley aint.
you aint catching a afk cloaker if you cant get close to him and deactivate it. why you ask? cloakers aint stupid enough not to set speed to max and **** off afk.
my buzzard does 375/s with couple cheap named nanos, by the time you have "scanned" him down and warped he is out of reach.
|
|
|
freya james
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 03:09:00 -
[11]
Absolutly agree with Fuzz Buzz.........cloakers neveer go "afk"! They go afk while moving in a direction that has no "warp points" so go ahead and get ur scan probe or what not........but we wont be there when u get there.
|
SumDum
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 11:29:00 -
[12]
Coming from someone that spends most of his time under the protection of a cloak, I think the ideas about the destroyer specializing in hunting cloakers are great thoughts.
Destroyers need love, and people that sit AFK for hours in a system in a cloaked ship should expect to come back to a nice view of the station through freshly cloned eyes.
In other scifi interpretations of cloaking devices, they do not seem to be impenetrable, and usually could be detected if a concentrated effort was applied. Adding cloaking probes would not destroy covert ops ability to scout under protection of cloak, if balanced correctly this would only keep jerks from sitting in a system cloaked attempting to keep people docked or whatever psychological torments they are hoping to achieve by their presence.
|
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
The Perfect Harvesting Experience
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 11:59:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Kolwrath
Please Read this Thread about this issue and stop whining about a player not even playing you tin foil hat poster boy.
What she says...
|
Phish1
Liberty Forces
Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 12:18:00 -
[14]
Originally by: FuzzBuzz
my buzzard does 375/s
made me lol
|
Damien Smith
Turbulent
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 12:43:00 -
[15]
I've lost count of how many times I've posted this, but I'm going to post it again:
The problem isn't that cloakers are afk in your system, the problem is that you know they're there in the first place!
A covert can't do anything but cloak and gather intel. They can't even cloak properly because of local so all they do is gather intel. Ohnoes, he's looking at me, tell him to stop mummy!
-----
My sparkly tinfoil hat is extremely distracting, and makes my eyes bleed. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
Join channel 'Turby' or die! (bring pie)
Actually... no, it was teh sig. I'm wearing tinfoil goggles already. -Teh Meow |
Chafin2
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 13:20:00 -
[16]
I think it all depends really on the area of effect missiles that CCP was talking about releasing for the stealth bombers. I know they've been wanting to kill the "blob mentality" of fleet battles. If they do release something along these lines and they are effective enough to become a concerning factor on the battlefield, people will really start to whine that cloaked ships are too hard to reveal. Following that CCP will most likely release modules that can detect and force cloaked ships into the open and probably create a new class of ship, or modify a currently existing one, that will specialize in using those modules.
Theres actually a large vat of untapped forms of combat in EVE that have yet to be pulled off successfuly that can revolutionize how fighting is done in EVE. AOE missiles, cloaked ships that actually pose a threat beyond "insta-popping frigates", mobile force field generators (either 360 degree bubble fields that allready exist in the game or a lock and shoot-through-able flat wall) for fleet on fleet battles...whatever, the possibilities are great. Only real problem is balancing the new releases with what we have now.
I just sometimes wish that there was more to the game than "break the tank".
|
Wild Rho
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 13:23:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Wild Rho on 11/03/2007 13:19:48
Having cloaks require fuel to run the module would be a viable approach (with the specialist covert ops ships being far more efficient fuel consumption wise).
It would help turn the cloak into a tactical module that you use when needed rather than somthing you can run 24/7 and go afk with.
|
Zezman
Murder of Crows
E N I G M A
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 13:27:00 -
[18]
Originally by: SumDum
Coming from someone that spends most of his time under the protection of a cloak, I think the ideas about the destroyer specializing in hunting cloakers are great thoughts.
Destroyers need love, and people that sit AFK for hours in a system in a cloaked ship should expect to come back to a nice view of the station through freshly cloned eyes.
In other scifi interpretations of cloaking devices, they do not seem to be impenetrable, and usually could be detected if a concentrated effort was applied. Adding cloaking probes would not destroy covert ops ability to scout under protection of cloak, if balanced correctly this would only keep jerks from sitting in a system cloaked attempting to keep people docked or whatever psychological torments they are hoping to achieve by their presence.
BEST
SIG
EVER
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 13:54:00 -
[19]
I always liked the idea of some kind of system wide decloaking pulse. Long cycle time, to prevent 'cycle decloaking' but what it literally does, is decloak everything. If you're at keyboard, this is inconvenient, but not a killer - recloak, and you're done.
|
Draaki
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 14:16:00 -
[20]
Why do pilots automatically show up in local chat upon entry to a system anyway?
|
|
|
FuzzBuzz
Caldari
Templars of Space
CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 14:37:00 -
[21]
ok, for some of these modules, like the pulse decloaker, something would have to be buffed in covert ops
5000m decloak field
2 second delay in recloaking after disabling cloak manually
ALL covert ops ships can warp with cloak enabled
instant cloak, no animation, or even quicken the animation
one of the biggest threats to a covert oper imo is a nanoceptor, those mofos are to quick and if you decloak when something like a pulse fires, you can besure the ceptor is heading for you at 15km
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 15:18:00 -
[22]
A cloaked AFK in a system several AU away from you is no threat. It only becomes a threat when it warps near to you.
Any module that instantly decloaks a cloaked ship will be overpowered - a module that shows the cloaked ship JUST to the ship with the module fitted, would be bearable - but will still require buffing of cloaked ships as follows;
Covert ops ships;
Allowed to use from cloak
Passive targeter
Target painter
Cargo scanner
Normal ships;
Recalibration time removed
Penalty to scan resolution removed
All cloaked ships;
Remove from local.
After that, I think we'd have balance again
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.11 17:01:00 -
[23]
"No threat" is not really an argument for or against cloaks. Just because a ship "cannot do anything" while cloaked it does not make them balanced.
A barge or indy do not represent any "threat" either and do not rececieve a survivability boost because of that.
Also, a cloaked ship can be a very significant threat without uncloaking once. A cloaked scout shadowing your fleet can very well be the reason you loose an engagment.
I would agree though that an instant decloaking device would be too strong, especially at gatecamps. I wouldn't see any problem with a 5 minute probe/decloaking pulse, though.
|
SumDum
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 05:14:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Damien Smith
I've lost count of how many times I've posted this, but I'm going to post it again:
The problem isn't that cloakers are afk in your system, the problem is that you know they're there in the first place!
A covert can't do anything but cloak and gather intel. They can't even cloak properly because of local so all they do is gather intel. Ohnoes, he's looking at me, tell him to stop mummy!
You know, I normally don't get involved in this crap, but your elitist attitude just rubbed me the wrong way today.
I don't care how many times you have posted that, you will probably post it a few more times. Not everyone has the time to dig through archived posts to know that YOU have posted a response this stupid so many times in the past.
What's the problem with local?
Take ship, approach stargate > traffic control systems register ship as it approaches and uses said stargate > ship removed from local listing because traffic control computers have determined ship is no longer in system.
Gate activation > ship enters system. Traffic control computers know ship has entered system because it used the damn gate. Presence is announced in local as an aid to travelers regardless of affiliation. A very civilized system.
I will give you and your Titanic sized ego a couple moments to ponder why this might just possibly be so before I post another response to your extremly simplistic and insulting post.
Also, look mommy he's looking at me? Ok, let's strip your skill points down to the bare minimum, stick you in a bloated mining barge and see how you like cloaked hostiles in your system.
yes the system is setup to cater to care bears, it is also setup for unbridled PvP. Just because people want a way to attempt to locate and or decloak a cloaked AFK hostile does not mean you need to post your self serving comments about how many times you have posted a response to their idiotic theories before.
take the time to consider all sides before you start bashing other people for having a thought or two.
How to pwn
|
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 10:21:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Hoshi on 12/03/2007 10:18:04
Originally by: SumDum
What's the problem with local?
Take ship, approach stargate > traffic control systems register ship as it approaches and uses said stargate > ship removed from local listing because traffic control computers have determined ship is no longer in system.
Gate activation > ship enters system. Traffic control computers know ship has entered system because it used the damn gate. Presence is announced in local as an aid to travelers regardless of affiliation. A very civilized system.
So the pilot should stay in local list after he logs off or get podded then? Because there is no way for traffic control to know that he is not there anymore when either of these things happen.
I think you should read up a bit on some dev posts, the fact is that local was never intended to be an information gathering tool and that invalidates your entire argument that it's supposed to work as some real life traffic control.
----------------------------------------
A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
SumDum
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 11:29:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Hoshi
Edited by: Hoshi on 12/03/2007 10:18:04
So the pilot should stay in local list after he logs off or get podded then? Because there is no way for traffic control to know that he is not there anymore when either of these things happen.
I think you should read up a bit on some dev posts, the fact is that local was never intended to be an information gathering tool and that invalidates your entire argument that it's supposed to work as some real life traffic control.
So...killmails are just an out-of-game tool then? The information couldn't possibly be diseminated back to a traffic control system. Log off is log off, whataya gonna do.
Devs don't want it as an information tool for who is in system, they why put flags on characters? Really dumb idea to add features to something they don't want in the game.
I don't have time to read through dev blogs to find out how they didn't intend to use what for what. Simple fact is, local exists like it or not. Nerf it, and a whole new system crops up.
This discussion started over anti-cloak techniques, which I am sure have been debated to the ends of the earth like everything else here. Does that mean that it invalidates every single thread about it til the end of time?
It's funny how people will cling to the security blanket of cloak and lash out at any attempts to bring up a discussion about being able to penetrate it, thats all. I love my cloak, but I shouldn't be able to go afk in space for hours on end without risking being probed down by someone, simple as that.
How to pwn
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 12:05:00 -
[27]
Originally by: SumDum
I love my cloak, but I shouldn't be able to go afk in space for hours on end without risking being probed down by someone, simple as that.
And when you can find a way to detect AFK cloakers that doesn't as a side effect make the life of every non-AFK cloaker in the game absolute hell, maybe we'll actually get somewhere.
There are many valid reasons for cloaking that do NOT in fact involve PVP - the new exploration system being one of them.
Exploration takes an AGE to get results. The last thing you need is everbody and his dog chasing you around while you do it - especially as the tell-tale local channel makes it quite clear to everyone that you are in system. Since there is no system that will guarantee your cloaker is AFK, then it's not justifiable to introduce a system that will detect ALL cloakers, and certainly not without cloaked ships receiving a substantial boost to their lamentable performance in return.
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
SumDum
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 12:25:00 -
[28]
Good point Grey, I haven't done much exploration probing yet. And I suppose sitting there long enough for the probe to finish would mos def get you killed, since you can't warp and have a probe succeed.
How to pwn
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.12 14:34:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Aramendel on 12/03/2007 14:48:58
Originally by: SumDum
Devs don't want it as an information tool for who is in system, they why put flags on characters? Really dumb idea to add features to something they don't want in the game.
Because you could already get the information, although only by the more tendious and lag-induing way of doing show info for all players in the system. Basically, that change did nothing to the information content of local, but made it less tendious & unfun to get that information.
The devs stated multiple times that they are not that happy with local as it is now, that is a plain out fact. Ignore it or accept it.
However, they cannot simply remove it either. While local gives a bit too much information too fast without it we would be at the other extreme. So it has to be replaced with something else, not removed.
And, while the devs are not happy with local I think they neither that unhappy with it to give the design of a replacement a high priority. So whileit most probably will be changed eventually it will still take a fair bit of time for this to happen.
In the meanwhile nothing speaks against making small adjustments which improve gameplay, especially if they are low effort ones like adding flags to the avatars in local.
Originally by: Grey Area
And when you can find a way to detect AFK cloakers that doesn't as a side effect make the life of every non-AFK cloaker in the game absolute hell, maybe we'll actually get somewhere.
Something like that has (at least partly) already been suggested.
For example:
Anti cloak pulse. Deployable structure, about the same size as a medium bubble. 5 minute anchoring time. Once anchored it does automatically *once* a systemwide pulse which decloaks all ships. Once used it is either destroyed (should then be relativly inexpensive to produce though) or has to be unanchored and anchored again to get another pulse.
If you are in a cloaked ship & not afk you shout "ohnoes!", wait 5 seconds and cloak again and warp to another SS for the worst case that they timed a scanprobe to be finished at the same time the de-cloaking pulse happens.
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 22:31:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Aramendel
For example:
Anti cloak pulse. Deployable structure, about the same size as a medium bubble. 5 minute anchoring time. Once anchored it does automatically *once* a systemwide pulse which decloaks all ships. Once used it is either destroyed (should then be relativly inexpensive to produce though) or has to be unanchored and anchored again to get another pulse.
If you are in a cloaked ship & not afk you shout "ohnoes!", wait 5 seconds and cloak again and warp to another SS for the worst case that they timed a scanprobe to be finished at the same time the de-cloaking pulse happens.
No, no, no, no, no. You may think you have limited this module by making it a five minute anchoring time...but what's to stop every anchor capable ship in a fleet firing one off? 10 ships with that ability in a fleet and you're decloaking EVERY cloaked ship in the system once every 30 seconds. No thanks.
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
|
|
Tista
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 22:51:00 -
[31]
cloaks make titans/motherships invicible.. warp-out, cloak.. gone for ever
|
Bodhisattvas
mUfFiN fAcToRy
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 22:57:00 -
[32]
Hey hey leave mr cloaky alone people.....Mr rapier, arazu and pilgrim are happy as they are........
Nothing more entertaining than sneaking up on poor unsuspecting prey in complexes, missions etc.
|
Dust Rocket
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 01:51:00 -
[33]
So cloak is new NERF item now?
So sweet. I scanned one system for 2 hours and 30 mins till i fell a sleep. All this to find exploration site. So how long would of it take u to find me if i would not have cloak?
Some pulse thing to deactivate cloak will be end of cov ops ships to sneak past bubble camps. Every friggin ship will have this mod on and they radiate circles like bs do now.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 02:02:00 -
[34]
people want to whine about everything they can't kill. Someone musta ticked off OP with cloak, now he wants it nerfed.
Yeah nerf covert ops. The only real special ability they have besides cyno, and there we have another ship in the game without a use.
Seriously nerf cloak in any way, the covert ops, force recon ships like a Pilgrim, become the ****y sister ship to a curse, it'll be just a ship with nothing that makes it stand out.
While your at it, nerf the ability to move your ship while in combat, or to turn off your computer.
|
Jayson Lee
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 19:21:00 -
[35]
If I might add something. Whats wrong with the pulse idea suggested earlier? Only someone not paying attention would have problems with it?
As for the idea of several ships using this, it reminds me the warpcore stab debate. Time after time, people said it should not take several ships to stop 1 ship, so why is this different?
One mod that takes up to 10 ships to defeat seems like a pretty powerful mod. Personally I like the idea of making this a destroyer only type function. It gives them some love and fits well with the typical thought of a destroyer vs sub.
Think of it this way, every ship that has a purpose also has mods that can counter its effects, from guns vs shields to ecm vs eccm. Why should we not expect a covert ops ship to be counterable? You still have a huge advantage when it comes to remaining hidden, whats wrong with a little challenge? Somehow I doubt that the suggestions so far would make your ships useless? In fact I think it would make a dedicated covert ops ship more valuable.
Am I wrong in thinking that any ship can equip the crappy cloak and run it non stop? I mean as it stands right now cant any cheap frigate slap one on and hide in a safe spot watching the system? Make it so that these ships useing the crappy cloaks cant recloak right away, say the pulse overloads the cloaking device for 1 or 2 minutes. However allow the good cloak to recloak almost instantly, within 1 or 2 seconds. This is fast enough to protect any pilot at the helm.
|
Gahjek
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 20:19:00 -
[36]
if you had any form of anti cloak modules, no one would bother with cloak technology
|
Jayson Lee
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 20:24:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Gahjek
if you had any form of anti cloak modules, no one would bother with cloak technology
Why? Its kinda like saying if you have guns, no one would bother with shields.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 22:20:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Grey Area
No, no, no, no, no. You may think you have limited this module by making it a five minute anchoring time...but what's to stop every anchor capable ship in a fleet firing one off? 10 ships with that ability in a fleet and you're decloaking EVERY cloaked ship in the system once every 30 seconds. No thanks.
Every minute actually, at least after the initial 5 minutes. Takes 5 min to unanchor and 5 mins to anchor.
And, as said, if it's a one-use item such a behaviour would be rather wasteful and pointless vs a non-afk cloaker.
|
Mia Sasaki
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 23:06:00 -
[39]
Remove local chat, then the problem magically disappears.
I believe CCP has stated multiple times that they never intended local to be the intel gathering tool that it is now. Technically you shouldn't even know a stealth ship is there.
Optionally you could minimize local chat and pretend its not there, suddenly nobody is around but you.
I think every ones real gripe with stealth is that any ship can do it. If you knew the stealth ship was a cov-ops or recon, you'd be less likely to perceive this single ship as a threat. Address the real issues, not the technology that two ship classes rely on(My 2isk).
|
Gahjek
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 23:59:00 -
[40]
dont get me wrong, an anti cloak technology could be good, however, it needs to be very hard to get. if it was just 50m + 2 weeks training to achieve this, then every corp would have one. make it a couple of billion, and 6 months training time, ie a real speciality, then it could work. stealth pilots would be on edge, cause there's always that chance, and there's an option for people to train it, make it too easy and you might as well take cloaking out the game, cause it just wouldn't be worth training it, i think people in low sec have had the odds stacked in their favour for too long
|
|
|
Elderberry Whine
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 01:00:00 -
[41]
A good reason to AFK cloak is so you don't get hunted down at the logoff safespot...
TOO BAD, that's what cloaks is for, it ain't like they're not SUPER nerfed already.
(-50% sig res, target delay, 30 sec re-cloak delay, lost hi-slot)
TBH, they should cloak local to. You NERF whiners are just sorry.
Originally by: Joahanas Stone
I was wondering if anyone has come up with any ideas in hunting down cloaked ships. If there is anything in the game that ****es me off more than a cloaked AFK alta left in a system to annoy the crap out of people, I can not think of it. Maybe the DEV's could come up with a speciallized scan prob to help locate cloaked ships, like warp within 15k. then a group can just run around poping smart bombs in hopes of uncloaking them. This would also not nerf the specialized covert ops, they would just be able to stay cloaked and warp away. the ships not ment for cloaks would end up uncloaking to run, or sweating as ships looked for them. On the flip side, might actually make smart bombs more usefull. To me, the cloak just seems a little too untouchable. No one should be perfectly safe floating AFK anywhere in 0.0
|
flaming phantom
Minmatar
Tyrell Corp
INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 01:35:00 -
[42]
i like them as they are, stop whining, they make ur ships bad enough as it is. with a improved cloak II and a sensor booster II u still only get 90% as fast of a targeting speed. i live with it. and if they are afk who cares?
|
Jayson Lee
Minmatar
Universal Exports
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 05:26:00 -
[43]
I still dont understand why this particular module shouldnt have a counter to it? So far the only suggestions offered would really affect those AFK, and I am sorry but to walk away from your keyboard and not to risk losing your ship is wanting this game in easymode.
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 12:28:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I still dont understand why this particular module shouldnt have a counter to it?
Simply because, it's THE most self-nerfing module in EVE.
Find me ONE other module that when in use;
stops you activating any other module on your ship
slows your ship down by 75%
AFTER use;
makes you wait up to a minute before you can use any other system
And when FITTED, even if OFFLINE;
increases your lock time by 40%
All the nerf-cloak-whiners very carefully use the word "counter"...but I submit that even without a counter, the cloak as it stands is very much BALANCED.
You want your decloak ping thingy? Fine - remove all the above as compensation. Then we might have a starting point for a debate.
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 13:31:00 -
[45]
Depends really how the anti-thing is designed. If the anti-cloak ping is
- using quite a lot of your cargoroom
- takes quite some time to activate
- is destroyed after use
it would balance it vs cloaks *with* their current penalites just fine.
|
Jayson Lee
Minmatar
Universal Exports
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 13:54:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I still dont understand why this particular module shouldnt have a counter to it?
Simply because, it's THE most self-nerfing module in EVE.
Find me ONE other module that when in use;
stops you activating any other module on your ship
slows your ship down by 75%
AFTER use;
makes you wait up to a minute before you can use any other system
And when FITTED, even if OFFLINE;
increases your lock time by 40%
All the nerf-cloak-whiners very carefully use the word "counter"...but I submit that even without a counter, the cloak as it stands is very much BALANCED.
You want your decloak ping thingy? Fine - remove all the above as compensation. Then we might have a starting point for a debate.
I thought people complained because warpcore stabs where overpowered because they could not be stoped by one ship, they were nerfed. Now nanoships have been hit by the nerf bat as well, all because they were claimed to be overpowered because there was no way to stop their setup, so how is this different?
If you cloaks on ships, speed is not important for a bs that has its prey in sight either in a belt or camping a gate. The lock time can be overcome with sensor boosters, correct? Speed also can be compsensated a little to negate that problem too.
However a solo ship that can defeat any opponent 1v1 is not the main concern. It has to do with recon (which is what the mod is mainly used for) and the opposing sides inability to counter this. If the module was designed to allow ships to sneak into enemy territory and gather intel, then it stands to reason that the module does its job and is overpowered as there is no counter to this.
I would agree if its use in combat was the concern here, but its not, so lets not cloud the issue. A cloaked ship should be able to be found, I can see no reason to deny this.
I mean seriously, is what has been suggested that bad? So far the ideas put forth only affect those players who arent at the helm.
|
Shia laoli
Asteral Reprocessing
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 19:53:00 -
[47]
In the new contracts search option, there is mention of an anti cloaking pulse blueprint, do we know when these will be available?
|
NIkis
Minmatar
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 20:07:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I still dont understand why this particular module shouldnt have a counter to it?
Simply because, it's THE most self-nerfing module in EVE.
Find me ONE other module that when in use;
stops you activating any other module on your ship
slows your ship down by 75%
AFTER use;
makes you wait up to a minute before you can use any other system
And when FITTED, even if OFFLINE;
increases your lock time by 40%
All the nerf-cloak-whiners very carefully use the word "counter"...but I submit that even without a counter, the cloak as it stands is very much BALANCED.
You want your decloak ping thingy? Fine - remove all the above as compensation. Then we might have a starting point for a debate.
Very much agree with this. Cloak is a self nerfing module (except on cov ops ships who have cloaking module less nerfed because of builtin ship bonus, and special cloaking module) much worse than WCS - which was severely nerfed imo. So cloaking should stay this way. Or scrap the nerfs and start thinking about anti-cloak ?
|
Taran Summers
The Merovingians
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 20:20:00 -
[49]
This one's cake.
High slot item for scanning ships. Fires off a multi-au disruption pulse that can knock cloaks down.
Pulse hits a cloaked ship. Cloaked ship pilot has to type a 4 digit code that pops up to "stabilize" the field. This lets people at their keyboard stay sneaky, and afk floaters lose their cloak. |
NIkis
Minmatar
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 20:37:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Taran Summers
This one's cake.
High slot item for scanning ships. Fires off a multi-au disruption pulse that can knock cloaks down.
Pulse hits a cloaked ship. Cloaked ship pilot has to type a 4 digit code that pops up to "stabilize" the field. This lets people at their keyboard stay sneaky, and afk floaters lose their cloak.
Funny how enthusiastic some people can get 
But remember not even titans can fire a multi-AU something that affects a whole system
A more feasible idea would be to affect only the cell you're currently in (for example to bust cloaked gate campers, or to make sure theres no nasty surprises near a station). And even so the nerfs on the cloak module have to go, or this anti-cloak should have similar nerfs on it (or even worse since it can possibly work on multiple ships).
|
|
|
Sc0rpion
Minmatar
MetaForge
Ekliptika
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:51:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Sc0rpion on 20/03/2007 22:53:15
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I thought people complained because warpcore stabs where overpowered because they could not be stoped by one ship, they were nerfed. Now nanoships have been hit by the nerf bat as well, all because they were claimed to be overpowered because there was no way to stop their setup, so how is this different?
Because a cloaked ship has to UNcloak before it can do anything. In other words, a ship with a cloak has to sacrifice that advantage if it wants to engage you. Then once decloaked, they can't RE cloak until they kill you, warp away or break your target lock.
How many nano BS have you fought that stopped moving so they could fight you?
If nano BS could only be used for travelling, they never would have been nerfed. Instead, they became unstoppable killing machines. That is easily distinguished from the unstoppable "face in local chat that only upsets people because they can see them" machine that cloaks are.
If the issue is about combat, then guess what? Any pilot that can pwn someone with a cloak on his ship would probably have pwn3d that person easier without it.
And if the issue isn't about combat, then it must be about intelligence gathering. If that's the case, then the cloak isn't the problem - it's someone's inability to secure "their" space. Because like it or not, that's what cloaks are for: intelligence gathering.
Either way, if someone sees a problem with cloaks, the problem isn't the cloak, it's their incompetence.
Originally by: Tista
cloaks make titans/motherships invicible.. warp-out, cloak.. gone for ever
Capital ships (especially titans) should never have been allowed to equip cloaks. Something as massive as a small moon would create a gravity well large enough to be detected by bending light waves.
"The true secret to enjoying life is to live it dangerously."
-Freidrich Nietzche |
Tera Patrick143
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 03:08:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Tera Patrick143 on 24/04/2007 03:12:34
Edited by: Tera Patrick143 on 24/04/2007 03:09:38
Edited by: Tera Patrick143 on 24/04/2007 03:09:02
Originally by: Jayson Lee
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I still dont understand why this particular module shouldnt have a counter to it?
Simply because, it's THE most self-nerfing module in EVE.
Find me ONE other module that when in use;
stops you activating any other module on your ship
slows your ship down by 75%
AFTER use;
makes you wait up to a minute before you can use any other system
And when FITTED, even if OFFLINE;
increases your lock time by 40%
All the nerf-cloak-whiners very carefully use the word "counter"...but I submit that even without a counter, the cloak as it stands is very much BALANCED.
You want your decloak ping thingy? Fine - remove all the above as compensation. Then we might have a starting point for a debate.
I thought people complained because warpcore stabs where overpowered because they could not be stoped by one ship, they were nerfed. Now nanoships have been hit by the nerf bat as well, all because they were claimed to be overpowered because there was no way to stop their setup, so how is this different?
If you cloaks on ships, speed is not important for a bs that has its prey in sight either in a belt or camping a gate. The lock time can be overcome with sensor boosters, correct? Speed also can be compsensated a little to negate that problem too.
However a solo ship that can defeat any opponent 1v1 is not the main concern. It has to do with recon (which is what the mod is mainly used for) and the opposing sides inability to counter this. If the module was designed to allow ships to sneak into enemy territory and gather intel, then it stands to reason that the module does its job and is overpowered as there is no counter to this.
I would agree if its use in combat was the concern here, but its not, so lets not cloud the issue. A cloaked ship should be able to be found, I can see no reason to deny this.
I mean seriously, is what has been suggested that bad? So far the ideas put forth only affect those players who arent at the helm.
well i agree with nerfing/fixing cloaks to a certain extent..
take this into consideration
1. a certain type of probe that takes a lil' bit longer than the ordinary probe to find uncloaked people.. lets say 1 minute 30 seconds for the cloak probe...
2. that probe will only effect ships that don't have the role to be cloaked... i.e. battleships and various other ships... Because a recon ship / cov ops / stealth bomber can move quickly and be out of the range that they have probed the cloaked ship at and would therefore not be able to be uncloaked unless sitting still...
3. will prevent people from going afk while cloaked in ships that don't have the role (due to the speed penalties of cloaks) and will be harder for people to probe for them if they don't have the skills to use the cloak probe or something along that line... so the cloaking ship will have to move safespots once in awhile which comes as an obvious if such a probe does come into eve..
4. between cloaks and logoffski its really hard to catch people that don't want to be caught.... (understandable but ridiculous aswell when almost everybody in a vulnerable state does 1 of the above) 
|
Sigos
ORIGIN SYSTEMS
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 03:47:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Jayson Lee
Whats wrong with the pulse idea suggested earlier? Only someone not paying attention would have problems with it?
First off, you automatically lose the argument for your side. State your side, don't claim anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't paying attention.
Second of all, I do not think it's a bad idea to allow people to probe out cloaked ships, but why try to reinvent the wheel? We already have the mechanics in for this through the scan probes that are already around. There would only be two main changes to make:
1.) Allow probes to find cloaked ships. Simple enough. If the pilot is about and alert, he can easily warp around when he sees these probes start to appear on scan. This will disrupt any active mission he is on, but not horribly. If he is AFK and not moving, you will be able to land on him, decloak him, and kill him. If he is AFK and moving in a direction at a decent speed, you will have to do a couple probes to figure out which direction he is moving in, but it's more than possible assuming you can get close enough with the closest range probes.
2.) Have cloaks reduce the signature radius of a ship while activated, making it harder to probe them out. Prototypes might be -25%, improved -50%, and covert ops -75%. This, combined with the relatively small signature radius of a covert ops ship will make them extremely hard to probe. Recon ships, too, will be relatively hard to probe for this same reason. If a ship such as an interceptor activates one of the cloaks, it will be rather hard to probe out (although easier than to probe out a covert ops ships, going by the Gallente ships), but how dangerous is an interceptor, let alone one missing a high slot (despite the fact that they can still be quite annoying to deal with)? If a ship that poses a decent threat is cloaked (ie: Battleship or larger), the signature radius will still be large enough to make it rather trivial to find and destroy the ship, as the best they will have is -50%. Obviously, these values are up for debate.
|
Brea Lafail
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 04:05:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Brea Lafail on 24/04/2007 04:01:14
Leave dedicated stealth craft as they are, nerf other ships that just toss on a cloak (via cloaked vessel locater of some form). A supercapital ship should not be able to hide as well as a destroyer.
Make them scannable with normal probes, but very poor accuracy and low probability of getting a result? Idea being that if you drop a large bubble on every gate, they can only hide for so long before you finally get them.
Also, alt post. What you going to do about it?
|
Kasshim
Omega Strike Force
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 04:59:00 -
[55]
The way I see it, the problem should be solved by having cloaked ships automatically uncloak if after a set time of like 15-20 mins. This would eliminate the problem of afk cloakers. Since they would now have to safespot and log-off before leaving their ships unattended or risk coming back to a pod 15 mins later. We don't need probes to catch cloakers as that would make having a cloak pointless in the first place. A timer on cloaking is the best answer in my view.
Something like, "Staying cloaked in any ship other than a covert ops/recon or stealth bomber for more than 15 mins will result in the automatic uncloaking of the ship due to overheating". Covert-ops/recon and Stealth Bombers can stay cloaked for 30 min's before the same thing happens. That way, they will affect only the ships that weren't meant to have cloaks while the covert-ops, recons, and bombers keep their advantage.
|
Rashmika Sky
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 06:34:00 -
[56]
One way of looking at cloak ships is that, like any other type of ship in Eve, they have a role they have to be able to perform. Cloak ships, by their nature, are supposed to be cloaked most of the time when they are doing their jobs. The other side of this, is that other ship types are exposed to danger while performing their roles, as they can't perform them while cloaked. Cloaked ships, on the other hand... are cloaked and therefore relatively safer.
The question is, are cloak ships exposed to enough danger, or not? Any ship entering a hostile system has placed itself in at least some danger. However, as evidenced by afk cloakers... it's maybe not enough danger. People can argue that all they do is provide intel while cloaked, but good intel can have a huge effect on combat, strategies or tactics. Loose lips sink ships and all that. Knowing what's going on in the enemy camp is important. So let's not belittle the effectiveness of "just gathering intel".
Personally, I think a coordinated effort to find, and kill, a cloaked player should be able to succeed, if the player doesn't make a fair effort to avoid detection. After all, players can prevent any other ship type from performing its role if they make the effort, so why not covops? Given the nature of covops/recon taking place behind enemy lines, it seems reasonable to me that it should be a somewhat risky job if the enemy is actively searching for you. What would be necessary to make this possible without making it impossible for covops to do its job? I have an idea, maybe not the greatest, but maybe worth thinking about.
My idea is that covops/recon pilots should be able to track the path of probes as they move through a system, therefore being able to not only know if people are getting close to locating them, but also being able to locate where the probes are originating from, i.e., where the people are that are searching for them. Probably the only probes they should be able to see this way would be new, anti-cloak probes, otherwise... currently existing probes would actually backfire, if an enemy fleet had a covops pilot.
If we had some new, anti-cloak probe that, due to the way it worked, was able to be detected and tracked easily by covops pilots, that could add a bit to the sort of "behind enemy lines" feel of being a covops pilot, and give a bit of intelligence/counter-intelligence to Eve. To keep with that sort of feel, I'd say only covops/recon ships should be able to use the anti-cloak probes. So if you want to find a cloaked ship, you need a covops ship. And a non-covops ship wouldn't be able to see the probes coming, so while they could still get some use out of a cloak, such as sneaking past gate camps, they wouldn't be anywhere near as effective or safe as a cloaked covops ship. That seems reasonable to me.
Hope to hear your opinions.
-Rash
|
Dahin
Maza Nostra
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 06:37:00 -
[57]
look, it's pretty simple.
If probes gave results on cloaked people like any other people, then we would have:
* Catch afk people even if impulsing under cloak. First scan gives you where he was, another scan after a few mins gives you the point where he is now. You approach the 2nd result from the first and spit drones, keep moving in the same vector and voila.
* Catch people that you know are cloaked somewhere close to you for an extended period of time. You keep spamming scan and warp to result. You will catch him eventually and maybe, just maybe manage to get kill him.
* Not really nerf covops cloaks in any serious way
* Make the fit-a-cloak on random ships a final measure.
On a sidenote, it would make sense to give cloaks an active ECCM bonus. So even tho you can still be found it is a quite more difficult and it does buy you time. It is a balance between the two extremes.
|
Ronin Reborn
Dark-Rising
Fallen Souls
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 07:19:00 -
[58]
The problem as I see it isn't with Cov op/recons, it's with the tech 1 friggy packing a t1 cloak flown by a 2 day old alt.
In a game where information is so crucial it seems silly that people can put eyes deep into hostile space that can not be effectively dealt with. When a hostile ship is cloaked in your space you have no way of knowing what theyre flying, so you naturally prepare for the worst. Then you find out, 4 days later as they leave, it was a punisher with a cloak...
Imho, there should be a DRASTIC difference between a t1 cloak and a cov ops cloak. Not just warping, or speed or fitting...make them burn through cap, or be probe-able by specialized probes, or use fuel or whatever but make them do something that prevents this immunity they currently grant. Because what we have now is a cheap mod, able to be fit onto just about any ship, that renders you completely unable to be attacked...even if youre not playing.
FFS people, if youre going to come all the way out to hostile space to scout at least use the proper ship.
/end rant
|
Lorn Yeager
Gallente
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 07:37:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Damien Smith
I've lost count of how many times I've posted this, but I'm going to post it again:
The problem isn't that cloakers are afk in your system, the problem is that you know they're there in the first place!
A covert can't do anything but cloak and gather intel. They can't even cloak properly because of local so all they do is gather intel. Ohnoes, he's looking at me, tell him to stop mummy!
Signed. That is the only real "fix" to your problems.
If you make cloakers scannable or detectable, you defeat the purpose of the module.
|
Rashmika Sky
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 08:13:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Rashmika Sky on 24/04/2007 08:09:44
Originally by: Lorn Yeager
Originally by: Damien Smith
I've lost count of how many times I've posted this, but I'm going to post it again:
The problem isn't that cloakers are afk in your system, the problem is that you know they're there in the first place!
A covert can't do anything but cloak and gather intel. They can't even cloak properly because of local so all they do is gather intel. Ohnoes, he's looking at me, tell him to stop mummy!
Signed. That is the only real "fix" to your problems.
If you make cloakers scannable or detectable, you defeat the purpose of the module.
Perhaps a better way to phrase that is, "If you make cloakers scannable or detectable, you *can* defeat the purpose of the module."
But what is wrong with that? Name another active module that doesn't have some sort of counter in Eve. Anything that targets another ship - jam or damp. Anything that uses cap - nos. Anything that increases speed - web.
Certainly, a cloak has to be able to do it's job. But that doesn't mean there can't be some way to counter this. Eve is a pvp game, isn't it? So why should it be well-nigh impossible to counter a cloaked ship? Being in hostile territory should be risky for the unskilled or inattentive pilot, providing people bring the proper resources and effort to bear in an attempt to deal with them.
I don't think anyone is asking for cloaks to be made useless, just for the ability to take some sort of action against them. Why *should* it be impossible to detect a cloaked ship? I don't think the purpose of a cloak is to make a ship impossible to find, despite what some here argue. It is to make it more difficult to find. If that weren't the case, then cloaks wouldn't be dropped when objects reach a distance less then 2 km away from cloaked ships, because "that would defeat the purpose of the module."
-Rash
|
|
|
Strill
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 09:57:00 -
[61]
Originally by: FuzzBuzz
Originally by: Crusix Bargoth
-One high slot item that sends out 100km pulses every 10 second cycle, these pulses pull them OUT of cloak.
If its an active pilot he just re-cloaks and warps off if detected at range, in-active...motor up and pop him.
-A new probe that does the SAME thing while flying around, just pulls them out and goes "OMGZ YOU FOUND A SHIP D00D!" any recon pilot worth their salt is gone before you get there, thats their place, get in, recon, get out.
-Destroyers and interdictors get a 99% CPU or PG reduction like most other speciallty mods.
The thing is to have it pulse at such a long range that they will pop up on over view, but still have enough time to get out if they're quality pilots.
We need a mod that lets us FIND them, not insta WTFPWN them.
And drone netting isn't the solution, its an annoying way to maybe do something.
Just a thought.
ohh gimp a class of ship to unusefulness?
some of you need to get a clue. why not ask for cloaks to be gone from the game.
these are paper thin ships and your fracking scared of them, they cant do much damage to a alert pilot. unless there in gangs.
Tip1: Covert ops frigs aren't the only ships that can cloak.
Tip2: Titans are not "paper-thin" and can do quite a bit of damage.
|
Viashivan
Amarr
FM Corp
Insomnia.
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 10:54:00 -
[62]
I have been on both ends. I have been AFK cloaking myself and I was being AFK-cloaked. For those experiences I'm in favor of nerving cloaks.
Why?
I think the most valid argument against undetectable cloaking is the fact that it is in essence as docking up. With the advantage that there is no bottleneck. This is namely the process of undocking, which is missing therefore no one is able to see whether you undock or not.
Idea for a solution
In order to detect cloaked ships I would suggest this path. In a POS a new structure can be anchored that decloaks all ships in local. The drawback with that structure is that it eats storium form the control tower and is very expensive to run in terms of fuel and the setting up of the POS. More pos requirements like no shield hardeners, as this disturbs the signal, are required as well.
In addition for this structure to be anchored and go online system sovereignty is required. As soon as that structure all ships are uncloaked immediately except for cov-ops/ and force recon ships.
|
Caligulus
Caldari
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 11:53:00 -
[63]
Another subtle change would be to extend the range at which an object uncloaks a vessel; say 5km. At the very least there should be a probe that can detect the "type" of ship they're in.
If some clown goes afk in a covert ops frig in my system, i'd still go about my business but if it were a force recon or a HAC fit with a proto cloak. I'd reconsider. At least this way you have more options then "hey there's a cloaked hostile in system. Guess I can't really do jack unless I get people to cover my ass while i caerbear or what have you."
|
Tonny Jr
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 13:59:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Caligulus
Another subtle change would be to extend the range at which an object uncloaks a vessel; say 5km. At the very least there should be a probe that can detect the "type" of ship they're in.
If some clown goes afk in a covert ops frig in my system, i'd still go about my business but if it were a force recon or a HAC fit with a proto cloak. I'd reconsider. At least this way you have more options then "hey there's a cloaked hostile in system. Guess I can't really do jack unless I get people to cover my ass while i caerbear or what have you."
So in essence you want to feel safer while carebearing alone in 0.0?
Increasing the uncloak range to 5 km is in my opinion a bad idea, because this would make it a lot harder to sneak by gatecamps. Then again, I personally think gatecamps (in the extent to which they are implemented today) are bad for the game, whereas a lot of people probably don't.
As for the decloaking pulse idea,
if it only affected non cov-op cloaks then I agree it would be a good idea. Otherwise it would just make recon/ cov ops ships a lot easier to lose. Keep in mind outfitting a good cov ops/ recon is easily a very expensive venture, and their ability in combat does not really reflect the amount of money spent. Therefore I think they should retain their advantage towards staying hidden, since this is obviously the niche they're supposed to fill.
As for cov ops being able to launch anti cloak-probes, now there's an interesting idea. Balance it right (many good suggestions in the thread already) and I think we have a winner. |
Dashhammer II
Amarr
Federation of Freedom Fighters
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 06:16:00 -
[65]
I see the problem, but I think it's more of a design flaw instead of a nerf requirement. Let me explain. I've flown covops all over the place. At one point I flew 40 jumps up a pipe that AAA (hostiles) were convoying in the opposite direction. I went through FIVE gate camps and at least four of them knew I was coming. No one could catch me. They tried every trick in the book and nothing seemed to work.
The first one was the simple 'Tackler grab' which I countered by the (never fail) maxspeed/mwd/cloak buttons in that order, super fast. Once you hit max speed you begin to come out of cloak, once you hit your mwd, it doesn't need to remain active, that first pulse of acceleration will pull you incredible distances with inertia alone. The third button puts you back into cloak. If you are used to doing it, you can come out of a gate and only appear on thier overview for .1 seconds before warping away. Of course, since you were cloaked when you warped off, they don't actually know that you warped away and will probably search the area untill you disappear from local.
The second was similiar to the first, with more ships and an interdictor. You know how it goes, you load into a system and realize you are in a bubble, surrounded by at least 3 interceptors that are anxiously bouncing around by the gate. Same thing here too really, max/mwd/cloak and then everyone targets you and hits 'intercept target' hoping to run smack into you while you are cloaked however, since you had hit your mwd before hitting cloak, you are now at least 18k away from where you used to be and you giggle as they all crash into each other in that spot where you were.
The third was the opposite, it was a group sitting with a large deployable on the outbound gate with drones out. Man that was fun, it was like running a guantlet of drones and inties (while cloaked) untill one of them uncloaked me and I just MWD the rest of the way to the gate. SURPRISE!
The fourth was similiar.
The fifth is what got me. A very clever man set up a large on an outbound gate and warped from the gate I'd be coming in from to the gate I'd be leaving at. Feeling rather invincible I popped into the system and warped to the next gate, hitting his bubble and coming out of warp 500m from him. At which point he activated all of his smartbombs. I guess I had upset them by busting through the first four and they weren't going to let me get away just yet.
It's... rather unfortunate that his tactic is the ONLY way to kill a covops. But the covops shouldn't be nerfed, not in the slightest. It was origenally intended to do just what it's name implies. It is supposed to be a super-exetreme-ultra-undetectable recon ship. And it is, the problem is that it is impossible to be trully hidden if you show up in local. How can a scout sneak up on an enemy position and collect intel if everyone knows he's there but just can't kill him? It's a bit rediculous really. Still, if they know that he's around, they should have a mod or a tactic that'll kill him. Something that is a real threat. On the other hand, they should counter this by allowing covops to disappear from local after cloaking themselves. This would allow for some rather incredible feats of intel gathering and at the same time, it would let fleet commanders kill covops that they've either seen or know are in the area.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 07:23:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Tonny Jr
Originally by: Caligulus
Another subtle change would be to extend the range at which an object uncloaks a vessel; say 5km. At the very least there should be a probe that can detect the "type" of ship they're in.
If some clown goes afk in a covert ops frig in my system, i'd still go about my business but if it were a force recon or a HAC fit with a proto cloak. I'd reconsider. At least this way you have more options then "hey there's a cloaked hostile in system. Guess I can't really do jack unless I get people to cover my ass while i caerbear or what have you."
So in essence you want to feel safer while carebearing alone in 0.0?
Increasing the uncloak range to 5 km is in my opinion a bad idea, because this would make it a lot harder to sneak by gatecamps. Then again, I personally think gatecamps (in the extent to which they are implemented today) are bad for the game, whereas a lot of people probably don't.
As for the decloaking pulse idea,
if it only affected non cov-op cloaks then I agree it would be a good idea. Otherwise it would just make recon/ cov ops ships a lot easier to lose. Keep in mind outfitting a good cov ops/ recon is easily a very expensive venture, and their ability in combat does not really reflect the amount of money spent. Therefore I think they should retain their advantage towards staying hidden, since this is obviously the niche they're supposed to fill.
As for cov ops being able to launch anti cloak-probes, now there's an interesting idea. Balance it right (many good suggestions in the thread already) and I think we have a winner.
And you just want to feel safer when flying a recon in 0.0 alone?
And features and ideas has a few threads with ideas for cloak finding mechanisms you all might find interesting.
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Sofring Eternus
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 08:09:00 -
[67]
I wanted to expand on the idea of how people show up in local is because the jump gates alert people.
Perhaps all the corp chatter and alliance chatter etc also requires the jump gate to keep in constant communication with your ship, thus once your ship is out of communication ie: logged off, it then removes you from the local listing.
If you want out of local, perhaps it should also require you to lose all communication channels ie: Radio Silence, to avoid detection.
I think CovOps ships should have zero penalties for fitting a cloak, and they should then implement some anti-cloak scans or probes or what have you.
|
Morph01
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 09:59:00 -
[68]
well, if you ask me, cloaks should be nerfed.
well, maybe not cloaks, but we should be able to probe AFK cloakers.
cause tbh, what's the point on ppl that have 3+ accounts and use few of those for harassing other ppl. and the problems aren't covert ops, problems are recon ships.
2 recon ships can kill every BS (take arazu and rapier for instance, or falcon with it's ECM bonuses, or even pilgrim with NOS bonuses).
the problem is that there are ppl who just log in one of their alts, wapr him to SS, cloak themselves and go afk for the rest of the day.
we should get probes that would detect cloaked ships and we can warp there, but it's scanning time would be at least one hour.
|
The Rincewind
Reign in Blood
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 10:23:00 -
[69]
Edited by: The Rincewind on 26/04/2007 10:19:37
Originally by: LoKesh
I do agree that there should be a way to hunt down people who stay AFK at a safespot while cloaked. Hunting down anyone just temporarily cloaked, maybe not.
Perhaps a probe that could detect cloaked ships, but that had a huge cycle time? 45 minute base or more.
if u mean a chance to probe a cloaked ship which stays on 1 position and is not approaching the deep..... so u can warp on 0 meter on it and decloak the ship, then u re right.
|
Johnny Gurkha
Caldari
Villains
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 12:31:00 -
[70]
CCP should introduce a new type of smartbomb with an increased range that uncloaked ships are invulnerable to - imagine sending a few destroyers into a belt or safespot to "depth charge" it before your gang warps into it 
|
|
|
annab
Amarr
FireStar Inc
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 13:06:00 -
[71]
Personally as a force recon user. I think cloaks should be left as they are.
The draw backs to fitting a cloak, local and ship armor means they have a nerf. Adding decloaks means they remove these perbuilt nerfs.
Decloakers would be cool but you need to look at what we get as well. unseen on Local, more armor and shild, no reclibartion time, maybe lock targets while cloaked. Sounds about fair. 
The main problem is some warping to a safe spot and leaving the computer for 23 hours. This is the same as afk in a station it wastes server bandwidth. I think everyone can agree to that.
There are two ways to fix this.
1. Log out timer maybe waiting an hour. If the user dosen't move the mouse/touch the keyboard.
Problem some one could make a device to move the mouse. However 90% wouldn't spend the time making one.
2. Flash a message on screen that your ship has been powered down. Local is removed for that ship and all modules turn off. You can scan him/her with normal probs. When he presses turn on the ship powers up local comes back and the modules can be used again. Maybe with a power up timer. Say 30 sec no warp or high slot useage and no drone usage.
Problem macros to press on and doesn't remove station afk.
There is no 100% way to remove afk but it should not nerf the people who want to make a cuppa. So 30 mins to an hour is a good limit. An hour to make a cup of tea/lunch is more than enough time.
This is by no means perfect at removing afk players and its fair to both camps cloaks and non-cloaks as it does not hurt them just the afks.
|
Sailon
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 13:07:00 -
[72]
i agree anti cloak things on cheaper cloakers with protocloak or t2 version but covert cloak should be immune all this. Anti-cloaking devices should work like this: more cheaper the cloak is more easier its scan down for uncloak but it would have have not any effective on covert cloak ship
|
SpawnSupreme
|
Posted - 2007.04.26 18:27:00 -
[73]
my sugestion was to create tier 2 interdictors and as a nateral trait can see cloaked ships!
and then build a mod and skill to fix a mod to the ship that will highlight a cloaked ship to gang members!
|
Sirad
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 19:44:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Sirad on 05/05/2007 19:43:04
I still haven't seen an answer on how to find a cloaked player that is in bed sleeping.
ps.. I will leave my 2 accounts running 23 hours a day to just help out.
|
Xerrus
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 20:56:00 -
[75]
Has anyone noticed this category in the contracts tab?
|
Mifter Hogdido
Amarr
LEG1ON
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:11:00 -
[76]
In reply to the OP: No. Get used to it, deal with it, whatever, stop trying to nerf every damned thing in the game just because you get owned by it.
|
Herman Letchenstein
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:18:00 -
[77]
Go back AFK...
Originally by: Mifter Hogdido
In reply to the OP: No. Get used to it, deal with it, whatever, stop trying to nerf every damned thing in the game just because you get owned by it.
|
Mifter Hogdido
Amarr
LEG1ON
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:41:00 -
[78]
I rarely use my covert ops. Stop being such a noob asking for everything in the game that you either A) SUCK at using, or B) Get OWNED by daily, to be nerfed, just because YOU are not skilled enough to use it yourself.
Pathetic.
|
Selko Embries
QUANT Corp.
|
Posted - 2007.05.06 01:37:00 -
[79]
Everyone asking for a module that affects everything is local really needs to understand that no Module should affect everything in local. I would argue that no module should affect anything outside of 250km. Especially something meant to find the submarines of Eve.
I have long been in favor of expanding the destroyers role to let them hunt for covert ops ships. But it shouldn't be easy and should require the destoyer to be in visual range. I propose the following:
1. a set of probes that can help get you close to a recon ship.
2. a module like active sonar that can get you inside the 2km range required to uncloak a stealth boat. (2km is still just about right to decloak me)
3. A change to local to prevent the blatant intel gathering that occurs now.
A system wide pulse is just rediculous and far to powerful to allow into any MMO, much less this one.
Just because you are pure evil,
doesn't mean you can't be rolemodel. |
Tammahawk
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 16:00:00 -
[80]
personally you calf's need to stop wining about cloaks, its what the ship was intended for, and in no way should it be nerfed in any way as it is some people are using some exploit to find them now. and there shouldnt be i know from personal experience with out a single strand of dought, there is some way to find cloak ships , i watched a enh in his pos sitting there, all the sudden i seen him coming at me at high speed i moved quickly and thank god i was fast enough to evade him, i though maybee he was lucky, and just was moving around but when he landed in the exact spot were i was sitting, there aint no way he coulda done that its an exploit and it needs to be fixed, whats the sense of having a cloak if it does not work?, if it could be found it makes it a useless ship and i vote for no cloaking ships at all then you can take my ship and trash it if thats the case, u feel that threatened by a lil buzzard i feel bad for ya, must make ya feel like a big man to find a weaponless lil cov op ship, geeze the lameness of the people who want cloaks nerfed, get a life would ya, im in total favor of leaving every damn mod or ship in eve alone, cut the childish nerfing crap all together, everyone has an option to skill and use every ship and mod so why nerf ?, just because ur a lamer that got ganked by some other type of ship?, kinda lame if ya ask me, learn to play and stop wining if someone got ya with a certain ability, then train it your self and stop sniveling, my 2 isk Tammahawk
|
|
|
Vorketh Mordanil
Amarr
Brotherhood of Acquisitions
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 16:55:00 -
[81]
I have another idea... look in the CCP made guide for Moon Scanning. Right in there, they endorse AFK cloaking:
"This is where the cloaking device on your industrial comes in handy. At the end when you are still waiting for the last few results, warp to a safespot and cloak. By cloaking others looking for you with scan probes will not find you and you can peacfully go afk or jot down the results on paper."
Zhuge Liang, and ISD Forum Moderator made that post.
It's not broken. If they are AFK, they can't hurt you. Stop this nonsense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Zzz
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 18:16:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Grey Area
No, no, no, no, no. You may think you have limited this module by making it a five minute anchoring time...but what's to stop every anchor capable ship in a fleet firing one off? 10 ships with that ability in a fleet and you're decloaking EVERY cloaked ship in the system once every 30 seconds. No thanks.
Every minute actually, at least after the initial 5 minutes. Takes 5 min to unanchor and 5 mins to anchor.
And, as said, if it's a one-use item such a behaviour would be rather wasteful and pointless vs a non-afk cloaker.
From what I've read, the most annoying afk cloakers are the ones that hide in people's home systems and continually harass industrial activity. I therefore think it would make more sense to add this as some sort of POS structure, with a limit of one per system (like cyno jammers), requiring fuel & level 3 sovereignty (5 weeks)
I'm tempted to suggest having them go off automatically once per hour (with random deviations  ), as well as a manual activation option with a 10 minute cooldown.
------
Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant tanking |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |