EVE Search - Tech II Probes: Finding Cloaked Ships

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Tech II Probes: Finding Cloaked Ships

» 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 12 [13] 14 15 .. 15 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Dr Qu Caldari The Renegade Order Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.04.24 12:43:00 - [361] I think what many of you whiners that wine about whiny whiner fail to realize is that the main post in this thread was created to find a way to nerf AFK cloaking. Atleast that is what I read. To then see people spin out of control and out of topic, attacking things that arent related to the post is just humorous and proves that logic and active thinking is a thing of the past. This thread is about removing the AFK element of the game. To propose ACTIVE playing and not AFK playing. In my eyes, AFK Cloakers in local is every bit as annoying as Macro Miners. A way to NERF THE LIVING HECK out of AFK cloaking is defenitly something I would love to see, and all you other whiners that covet your AFK cloaking so dearly should go troll and spam in a Privateers thread instead
Ruddger Minmatar Acheron Vanguard Armada	Posted - 2007.04.24 13:09:00 - [362] This debate seems to have grown beyond its intention, so I'll offer my final thought and retire from it. Do not add further layers of content to try and "fix" cloaking. More content only leads to more possibilities for new imbalances that often simply switch one issue for another. Instead make cloaking subject to the same prevailing force that so many other mods are subject to, the chance to fail. Give cloaking a cycle time equal to its cool down, set it to auto cycle, and then give it a small chance for failure. Now the cloaker bears a burden or risk knowing eventually they will have to act to maintain the advantage. I doubt this will be a popular idea as no one wants to run into trouble and find that when they rolled the dice to escape they suffered an immediate loss, but that is the risk you take every time you undock. This idea also does not address cloaking a large vessel, and it will still frustrate the defender as if the chance to fail is appropriately small, remaining undetected for hours at a time will continue. A good compromise is when all parties walk away unsatisfied. With any luck no one will like this idea and then we will know that we are on to something viable to implement.
Liathus Firebane Gallente Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.24 13:34:00 - [363] Quote: Remove their ability to use warp jammers/inhibitors. Why should a t2 ship be unable to fit a module a t1 frig can, This is the worst idea i have ever heard.
Blue Pixie	Posted - 2007.04.24 13:53:00 - [364] Originally by: Liathus Firebane Why should a t2 ship be unable to fit a module a t1 frig can, This is the worst idea i have ever heard. Because it would stop them from being solo wtfpwn mobiles, while still allowing them to perform their primary intended function. Given the rest of their abilities, plus the opportunity to be removed from local, they could still gank... you'd just need a buddy to assist with tackling. Sounds like a pretty small price to pay to make everyone happy.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 15:49:00 - [365] Edited by: Grey Area on 24/04/2007 15:47:21 Originally by: Blue Pixie Because it would stop them from being solo wtfpwn mobiles, while still allowing them to perform their primary intended function. but TBH, they aren't solo wtfpwn mobiles NOW. Goumin is fond of posting his "web + warp + TD" setup for a covert ops...but neglects to add that it is then reliant on TWO small weapons to finish off it's target. If you can WTFPWN a target with two small weapons, then that target is a shuttle. If you reduce their combat abilities any further, they become a WTF WON'TPWN ANYTHING mobile. Similarly "Recon Ships" get talked up a lot as a class..but there's a hell of a lot of clear water between the racial variants (with Falcon very firmly at the bottom, unfortunately ) If you nerf the Amarr ship (I forget the name, I'll edit later if I can be arsed) to a point where it's not quite so wtfpwn, then the Falcon subjected to the same nerf become a paperweight, nothing more. And yes...AFK timers can be evaded...but if we're going to have to allow for "out of game" methods, then it simply can't be done...if I get 4 safespots in a system and use a macro (ooh, Grey said a dirty word) to just move between them constantly...no probe on earth is ever going to find me. So we're left with...fuel for cloaks. And that sucks so hard, it blows. I'll take fuel for a cloak when every other ship in the game takes fuel for its warps. You don't leave station without warping...copvert ops doesn't leave station without cloaking. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
Drunk Driver Gallente	Posted - 2007.04.24 16:02:00 - [366] Let's embrace this chanced based thing. I think cloaked ships should just explode at random.
William Alex Caldari Viscosity Dark Synergy	Posted - 2007.04.24 17:53:00 - [367] Originally by: Drunk Driver Let's embrace this chanced based thing. I think cloaked ships should just explode at random. <sidetrack> Chance based is why I don't use EWAR, ever seen a Rook fail 25 consecutive jams with jam strength rigs, and full t2 jam "damage mod" in the low slots? I have. I'll take the predictable output of a Sensor Damp over the ineffectiveness of that any day. </sidetrack> Cloaking is good, but as everyone's said, going afk while cloaked is kind of cheesy as far as tactics go, I assume CCP is working on this already though so just hold out for a possible fix Soon(tm). Originally by: G.W. Part of the facts is understanding we have a problem, and part of the facts is what you're going to do about it.
0August0 Gallente Gooch Unlimited	Posted - 2007.04.24 18:33:00 - [368] How about the cloaker has to press a button once a minute to keep the cloak going? That would take care of afk cloakers and keep active ones from being found. . . . Regards, August
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 18:47:00 - [369] Originally by: 0August0 How about the cloaker has to press a button once a minute to keep the cloak going? That would take care of afk cloakers and keep active ones from being found. And generate a whole load of repetitive strain injury lawsuits... Seriously...why? Only if everyone else has to press a key every second to stop their shield booster turning off, or miner II turning off, or weapons turning off... I don't want to be singled out just because some idle arse happens to fly the same ship as I do, but goes AFK. Nerf HIM, not ME. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
Dimitrios Ypsilanti	Posted - 2007.04.24 20:33:00 - [370] Originally by: Blue Pixie Remove cloaked ships from local. Blue Pixie you're a machine. You have proven absolutely impervious to the countless descriptions of the problem, arguements & cute analogies constructed by those seeking a solution to the stated problem of AFK cloakers. In responding to an issue with a solution that actually makes cloaking even more one-sided in its advantages your resolved nature borders on the "Bushian." I know when I've been defeated. I dub you Forum PvP Samuri. Before I cede the field to the victors I'd like to make a final note: I fly a cloaked ship. Something that I might have mentioned earlier. As the newbie in my corp I'm usually short the ISK necessary to sacrifice a BC to the fleet PvP gods every time our system is attacked (several times a day). So in order to participate meaningfully without going broke I've got a cloaked frigate fitted with tackle gear. I'm usually the guy who jumps into the hostile gate camp, zips off to a safe position and returns to a cloaked spot at 50k to watch the enemy form up. In this capacity I'm usually perfectly safe. And as a result, even though I'm often in a system completely loaded with hostiles, I've got one of the most survivable positions in the game. All while sitting well within sniping range of a blob of HACs. The probing system I've proposed here would put my current role in some danger. I'd be at much more risk for my given mission than I am now. But as long as I'm actively playing against those who are playing me I think I can still gain a lot of value from my cloaked position and still be able to contribute in my role.
Liathus Firebane Gallente Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.24 21:04:00 - [371] Edited by: Liathus Firebane on 24/04/2007 21:07:49 Quote: Because it would stop them from being solo wtfpwn mobiles, while still allowing them to perform their primary intended function. my arazu has a bonus of warp disrupter range, not being able to fit a scram on it would stop it from performing one of its primary functions...
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:02:00 - [372] Originally by: Dimitrios Ypsilanti Originally by: Blue Pixie Remove cloaked ships from local. Blue Pixie you're a machine. You have proven absolutely impervious to the countless descriptions of the problem, arguements & cute analogies constructed by those seeking a solution to the stated problem of AFK cloakers. AFK cloakers may be your starting point...but every system I see suggested by "your" side of the argument has JUST as much impact on active cloakers. You think local is essential. We think it's essential that it goes; not from the CURRENT standpoint, but looking forward to a future with cloak probes. Local is a free probe...if you accept that cloaked ships remain in local, explorers might as well petition that exploration sites appear in local too...thus obviating the need for that pesky initial "multispectral" scan...you know, the one that just tells you that there IS indeed something there to find. Of course sometimes there isn't, and then we get a little annoyed * disappointed and move on to the next system. But if these sites DID appear in local, it would be a free for all...no site would last more than about 30 seconds from it's original spawn, because it would pop up in local and everyone would go diving after it. With detection probes and local, you'd get exactly the same effect, but with cloakers on the receiving end. No thanks. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:09:00 - [373] Hey Grey Area, try not to bring up arguements that have already been ripped to shreds, just direct them to the discussion we already had. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:20:00 - [374] Originally by: Goumindong arguements that have already been ripped to shreds What's the weather like on your planet? Maybe you dreamed about that post where you defeated the argument...'cos you sure as hell never posted it. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:22:00 - [375] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Goumindong arguements that have already been ripped to shreds What's the weather like on your planet? Maybe you dreamed about that post where you defeated the argument...'cos you sure as hell never posted it. There is 5 pages of that ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:27:00 - [376] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Goumindong arguements that have already been ripped to shreds What's the weather like on your planet? Maybe you dreamed about that post where you defeated the argument...'cos you sure as hell never posted it. There is 5 pages of that 5 pages of us arguing...I don't see you WINNING anywhere. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.04.24 22:31:00 - [377] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Goumindong arguements that have already been ripped to shreds What's the weather like on your planet? Maybe you dreamed about that post where you defeated the argument...'cos you sure as hell never posted it. There is 5 pages of that 5 pages of us arguing...I don't see you WINNING anywhere. That is because there is no condition of what wins an arguement that can be judged by a person who lacks the logical ability to posit cogent arguements. But whether or not i shreded your arguements, that can be viewed objectivly, and yea, they were shreded. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.24 23:13:00 - [378] Get over yourself...I'm happy for others to judge...thanks for the link, saved me the effort. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.04.24 23:44:00 - [379] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Dimitrios Ypsilanti Originally by: Blue Pixie Remove cloaked ships from local. Blue Pixie you're a machine. You have proven absolutely impervious to the countless descriptions of the problem, arguements & cute analogies constructed by those seeking a solution to the stated problem of AFK cloakers. AFK cloakers may be your starting point...but every system I see suggested by "your" side of the argument has JUST as much impact on active cloakers. You think local is essential. We think it's essential that it goes; not from the CURRENT standpoint, but looking forward to a future with cloak probes. Local is a free probe...if you accept that cloaked ships remain in local, explorers might as well petition that exploration sites appear in local too...thus obviating the need for that pesky initial "multispectral" scan...you know, the one that just tells you that there IS indeed something there to find. Of course sometimes there isn't, and then we get a little annoyed * disappointed and move on to the next system. But if these sites DID appear in local, it would be a free for all...no site would last more than about 30 seconds from it's original spawn, because it would pop up in local and everyone would go diving after it. With detection probes and local, you'd get exactly the same effect, but with cloakers on the receiving end. No thanks. with any detection probes at all you would have that there is no way i can see anti-cloak drones working high skills - great make the 2 year old player have another advantage over the newb no advanced skills - w/e cloaks will be useless the whole point if cloak is so that you WONT be detected, you might as well remove local and have no cloak if you want anti-cloak probes so much cause thats what itll be like
Blue Pixie	Posted - 2007.04.25 00:40:00 - [380] Okay, here we go... Put cloaks on a timer. Let's say 90 minutes. If after 90 minutes, the cloaked pilot does not disable his cloak ù at least temporarily ù his vessel turns into a Doomsday Device, blowing up everything in a 300km radius, including himself. How's that?
MI Koshkin The Protectorate Corporation Pax Familia	Posted - 2007.04.25 04:05:00 - [381] Anyone who supports AFK Cloaking is a traitor to their country, hates their mother, murders kittens and steals lollipops from young children. Kosh
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2007.04.25 04:41:00 - [382] i like the idea of being able to scan them down for an increased scan time if you hold system Sov. even speculated cloaking technology has always created an energy signature of some sorts. i think sg-1 even did it once by identifying the energy signature. People argue when their personal views are at odds, whereas a debate is a more formal method of analyzing the angles of an issue
Ahz	Posted - 2007.04.25 06:49:00 - [383] Edited by: Ahz on 25/04/2007 06:45:41 Did you know that at 400 posts to a given forum item the devs automatically implement whatever idea was offered by the OP? That's how we got titans. True story.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.25 07:54:00 - [384] Originally by: Ahz Edited by: Ahz on 25/04/2007 06:45:41 Did you know that at 400 posts to a given forum item the devs automatically implement whatever idea was offered by the OP? That's how we got titans. True story. Well, it makes about as much sense as all the other arguments that have been put forward... --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment.
yaaarrrr	Posted - 2007.04.25 09:19:00 - [385] nerf bat fools ftl Get over it adapt and play the game Cloak's do not need to be nerfed. People unwiling or incapable of learning how to counter it need to be nerfed.
Naliana Gallente Pillowsoft	Posted - 2007.04.25 12:43:00 - [386] Let me slip in my 0.2 isk here. I feel a BURNING NEED to. Having been on the receiving end of roving recon gangs myself (and a fond covops pilot), AFK cloaking, and indeed cloaking on the whole, needs a workover. There should be a new class of probes and/or a POS module to allow you to detect cloaked ships. Now, before you jump down my throat, let me outline what I think would work well. 1) Probes. Now, none of this taking-an-hour-scan nonsense. Make it a nice, sensible scan time. Like.. say 10 minutes? Reducable with skills, of course. BUT THEN CLOAKING IS USELESS, I hear you say. Why's that? Recons and Covops can warp. So once you see that a probe's been launched, you know you can move. Yes, this DOES affect ships that can't warp whilst cloaked.. but come on. Cloaking in a major advantage to those and this helps offset it somewhat. 2) POS module This might be a better option. If done right. Instead of this stuff about ludicrous expense, or pointless uses/day or something, I suggest this: A POS module that uses say, 1000tf or something. It prevents the cloaking of ships within say.. 1AU or something? BUT, it can only be placed on small POS. Which means alliances can go and destroy these smaller POSes, so their intel gathering can take place. And it would stop people from having them at large POSes, so that cloak spying on fleets, capital yards, whatever can still take place. Thoughts? --
Ilea Celentay Veiled Justice	Posted - 2007.04.25 13:11:00 - [387] Originally by: Naliana POS Module thingy Idea... Like many others I hate AFK cloakers, I have not had any exp. with such a pilot but I understand why it would be a real pain to have someone around that could appear at any time. Yes, there are simple counters like don't go alone etc. etc. but still, AFK cloaking just to annoy an enemy is annoying. The POS module sounds pretty interesting and would be funny. 1AU range on it would be pointless, since you can scan a POS and get full details from up to 14AU (directional scanner). Generally a full; system "Anti-cloak", (friendlies inc) would be a interesting idea. But alas not seeing that coming any time soon. But since system wide POS related things might be related to Constellation Sov and such likeness, maybe something will come eventually. Faction Ship Info \|\| Rig Factory
Naliana Gallente Pillowsoft	Posted - 2007.04.25 13:13:00 - [388] Originally by: Ilea Celentay Originally by: Naliana POS Module thingy Idea... Like many others I hate AFK cloakers, I have not had any exp. with such a pilot but I understand why it would be a real pain to have someone around that could appear at any time. Yes, there are simple counters like don't go alone etc. etc. but still, AFK cloaking just to annoy an enemy is annoying. The POS module sounds pretty interesting and would be funny. 1AU range on it would be pointless, since you can scan a POS and get full details from up to 14AU (directional scanner). Generally a full; system "Anti-cloak", (friendlies inc) would be a interesting idea. But alas not seeing that coming any time soon. But since system wide POS related things might be related to Constellation Sov and such likeness, maybe something will come eventually. The 1AU was just an example ;) --
SiJira	Posted - 2007.04.25 16:02:00 - [389] Originally by: MI Koshkin Anyone who supports AFK Cloaking is a traitor to their country, hates their mother, murders kittens and steals lollipops from young children. Kosh you mean anyone who wants to nerf it to the point of self-nerfing if you even fit cloak modules.
Keopa Caldari The Tierijev Compact	Posted - 2007.04.25 16:43:00 - [390] I noticed that this thread has been on the first page for awhile and figured I'd make it longer. First off, I have not read any pages between the first and last, sorry. Idea: In order to find a cloaker, you need three ships with a high slot module with activation cost and fuel requirements similar to a cyno field generator. The three pilots need to be in a gang and cannot move for the duration of the scan. Basically the ships work like scan probes and need to triangulate on the cloaker. Oh, and just to make someone sad, maybe let only cov op ships use this module, gives them another role, and makes them more popular, an anti cloaker, cloaker? Anywho, have a nice day

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 .. 15 :: 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.