| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 27 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
SiJira
   |
Posted - 2007.05.14 18:33:00 -
[541]
 Originally by: DRMALIKIA
Has CCP even responded to this thread yet? Stop wasting your breath the lot of you!  Obviously they either don't care or don't want to get in a debate about it.
Some in this thread have valid points but why continue to rehash the same verbage over and over and over again if no one is listening?
How many pages of banter before CCP either speaks on this topic or one ofyou has a brain anuerism and dies? 
no need to reply to read
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Seth Ruin
Minmatar
Galactic Exploration and Mining Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 18:46:00 -
[542]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: Lord Frost
1. when they uncloak they are one of the most dangerous ships around! Recon ships are very very dangerous to deal with.
not as dangerous as a ship with no cloaks
once its uncloaked the advantage is off
and you let me know how it is an advantage knowing about your opponent when he already has a ship that can beat yours hands down
You're kidding, right? The advantage is that cloakers are free to choose their fights whenever they wish. Nobody can force you to uncloak.
While I side with cloakers in that having their name appear on local is just plain stupid, I also agree there should be some sort of counter. A scan probe is one possibility, and another possibility would be a module similar to a smartbomb that would force cloaked ships in its area of influence to decloak. I haven't read all of this thread, but I'm willing to bet there are thousands of ideas for counters... the specifics aren't important. What is important is the fact that there needs to be some way to counter cloaking.
If CCP allowed cloakers to not show up in local, how would scan probes harm cloakers anyway? Nobody would know they were there unless, like a fool, they revealed themselves earlier and remained in the same system. It sounds like a win-win situation.
|
Lord Frost
Minmatar
The Crystal Method
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 19:03:00 -
[543]
Edited by: Lord Frost on 14/05/2007 19:02:58
Originally by: SiJira
(his rabble rabble)
Get a clue... the biggest advantage is the surprise. Recon ships are by far one of the best pvp ships around AFTER they uncloak... go take the Eve Recon 101 class.
Are you even part of 0.0 or just here with an alt trying to be somebody? I've been a part of tracking hostile cloakers in my home system, and its a joke. Cloakers do nothing and can effect the entire system. I've had parties plan and bait for 3+ hours, and to no effect. They waste your valuable time and assets, while cloakers sit and pick-n-choose when and who to kill. Bait tactics RARELY work.
I don't need to read more of this thread, as I can see you only care about your selfish agenda and not the gameplay as a whole.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 20:16:00 -
[544]
Originally by: Seth Ruin
You're kidding, right? The advantage is that cloakers are free to choose their fights whenever they wish. Nobody can force you to uncloak.
so they cant do anything to you if you got a ship that can kill em for each of their cloaks Quote:
While I side with cloakers in that having their name appear on local is just plain stupid, I also agree there should be some sort of counter. A scan probe is one possibility, and another possibility would be a module similar to a smartbomb that would force cloaked ships in its area of influence to decloak. I haven't read all of this thread, but I'm willing to bet there are thousands of ideas for counters... the specifics aren't important. What is important is the fact that there needs to be some way to counter cloaking.
If CCP allowed cloakers to not show up in local, how would scan probes harm cloakers anyway? Nobody would know they were there unless, like a fool, they revealed themselves earlier and remained in the same system. It sounds like a win-win situation.
alliances will get something that will allow them to catch cloakers as a by-product of their sovereignty
when you can spend millions on a pos you deserve it
no one else deserves to find a cloak because people will stop fitting cloaks
what dont you guys get ?
or is that what you want? no one fitting cloaks anymore
i gaurantee you people will quit when the average player can go around spamming some sort of scan probes to find a cloaker
if the goal is to make 2 people quit and 3 people start playing eve then i guess it will be a moot point from CCPs perspective
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 20:19:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Lord Frost
I don't need to read more of this thread, as I can see you only care about your selfish agenda and not the gameplay as a whole.
then i dont need to reply to your points because they are foolish - they have already been answered and disposed of in this thread
also you might want to check to my avatar and not refer in the masculine to me because its very sexist
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Chelone
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 01:19:00 -
[546]
Originally by: Alski
Individual pilots causeing large scale disruption to alliance operations without even being in the house, let alone at there keyboard = overpowered.
Individual pilots causing large scale disruption to alliance operations = the only remaining fun you can have in 0.0 without a titan fleet. 
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 01:47:00 -
[547]
Originally by: Chelone
Originally by: Alski
Individual pilots causeing large scale disruption to alliance operations without even being in the house, let alone at there keyboard = overpowered.
Individual pilots causing large scale disruption to alliance operations = the only remaining fun you can have in 0.0 without a titan fleet.
thats a good point
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 18:50:00 -
[548]
they will not nerf us
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Tweekism
Caldari
Tweek 'n' Co
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 04:58:00 -
[549]
Ok, lets take a step back, I find when you get in an argument that goes round in circles as this one does it often helps to look at it from another angle.
I just got a prototype cloaking device for my Heron yesterday (for exploration) so i'll admit I'm new to the whole cloak thing. I'm curious though, to know if this debate would have ever come up if we weren't spoilt by the implementation of local. As we all know, local has other problems, problems that won't be fixed by nerfing afk cloakers (ambush tactics, identifing war targets are two simple examples that come to mind). What would happen if we were to nerf cloaking (with probes for example), then a few months down the track, change local? Would this in effect, render cloaking near totally useless?
As some people have mentioned it seems that this problem and that of local and tied together. Maybe not so much local itself, but the way local has influenced the way we fly though space, ie: jump into a system, look in local chat to see if anyone is here, if so try to find them so you can drive them off so you can rat in peace, or move to a new system with an empty local, etc.
So what would removal of local do to cloaking as it is now?
Well, for starters it would allow covert ops and recon ships to actually do their jobs (Note: I'm limiting this hypothecal situation to frigates and the recon cruisers for now, and we'll deal with the cloaking titans a little later on, ok?). To me, a recon ship (if i was asked to describe one with no knowledge of eve) would be a small light ship capible of remaining undetected in enemy territory for days (yes 23/7) while being incapable of doing much in the way of actual damage. A Heron seems to fit that description and a Buzzard seems to fit the description of a really good one. Ok so they're called Covert Ops in eve, we can live with that, except they can't remain covert. Having this little Buzzard in local is very annoying (jeez even the name is annoying) but really, thats all (remember we're gunna nerf those cloaked BS's separately).
Even if you saw a covert ops ships in your system and then he flew off and cloaked, after ten minutes you could never be sure if he logged off, left the system, is still hiding afk in a deep safe spot, or is sitting 3000m in front of you. Unless you have all the exit gates bubbled, but then since they can warp cloaked at 100km, whos to say they can't sneak through anyway.
Ok so on to those battleships...
|
Tweekism
Caldari
Tweek 'n' Co
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 04:58:00 -
[550]
Ok so on to those battleships. Yes this seems to be a bit of a problem, but the solution doesn't seem that complex once you remove the other (cloaking vs local) problems, in fact, it's already been done! The best comparison I can think of is afterburners, imagine being able to fit a frigate sized MWD on a battleship... yay, 525% speed boost and no fitting problems. This ofcourse doesn't work, it would be silly, instead the speed bonus is penalized (exponentially?) vs the mass of the ship.
Ok, so back to cloaks (A hypothecal situation)...
First of all, why don't cloaks use cap? that seems a little silly to me since you'd need some sort of power the generate the cloaking field, so lets make it use cap (please now just bare with me, I know 10 ppl just stopped reading and are already planning their hate mail). Now with that lets apply the same template we stole from above. Lets have frigates use little cap, an insignificant amount of cap while cloaked so that in effect we are not changing they way cloaks work (that is on the ships they were designed to work on). Now lets penalize that cap usage so that it increases exponentially vs signiture radius, or mass, or volume, whatever blows your skirt up, so that it uses a little on destroyers, a lot on cruises, a whole lot on BC's and so much on BS'es that you can't stay cloaked more then 2 or 3 minutes before the cap is dead and/or without seriously gimping the setup.
Ok now that I have 20,000 battleship pilots screaming at me, we can take this one step further. Lets release battleship and prehaps capital sized cloaks the are actually designed to be used on this ships and have realistic CPU and MW fittings for this type of ship, forcing the pilot to reduce his damage output or his tank the same way fitting a AB/MWD would.
Now I just want to stress that this is a hypothecal solution I'm putting out there that you guys and girls can comment on. We don't have to use cap, we could penalize CPU usage or cycle time, like make it so a frigate sized cloak will only cloak a battleship for 3 seconds at which time we'd have to wait 27 seconds before we can recloak, however i have a feeling this would be harder to implement. In either case the covert ops cloak would need less of a penalty (have it use the cap of a Damage Control I for example) since its only for those special ships anyways. So overall this wouldn't be a "nerf to cloaking" but rather a slight adjustment to compensate some small oversights reguarding cloaks at the time of conception (now there's a euphemism for NERF! if I ever heard one)
I know this seems like the long way round... Nerf local, nerf Battleships, add modules, tweak exsisting modules etc. but when you consider that this will fix a whole host of problems inherent to local, prehaps its worth it and it would remove the need to nerf other things like logon traps for example. At the risk of turning this into a discussion about local (I mean moreso than it already is) I won't discuss ideas on how to fix local here, there are plenty of good ideas, and bad ones, in other threads.
|
|
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 05:24:00 -
[551]
Edited by: SiJira on 16/05/2007 05:21:38
good posts tweekism
sounds fine to me - we all know real cloakers only use specialized ships anyways
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 17:34:00 -
[552]
im surprised they gave something to alliances on the test that will probably make it into the game
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Tweekism
Caldari
Tweek 'n' Co
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 01:11:00 -
[553]
Edited by: Tweekism on 17/05/2007 01:11:40
Originally by: SiJira
good posts tweekism
...
Thank you 
I would like to know what some of the people from the "Cloaking should be be changed" camp think about my post, to see if its truely an option everyone would be happy with
Trust me to place my ideas as the last two post of page 19, on a thread that has gone quite, where no one will ever read 
Feel free to quote me on a cloaking thread that IS active, lol
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 08:11:00 -
[554]
Originally by: Tweekism
Edited by: Tweekism on 17/05/2007 01:11:40
Originally by: SiJira
good posts tweekism
...
Thank you
I would like to know what some of the people from the "Cloaking should be be changed" camp think about my post, to see if its truely an option everyone would be happy with
Trust me to place my ideas as the last two post of page 19, on a thread that has gone quite, where no one will ever read
Feel free to quote me on a cloaking thread that IS active, lol
its not an issue because the anti-cloak gang knows they are being ludicrous
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Demarcus Gainah
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 10:33:00 -
[555]
Originally by: GeekWarrior
Why not make cloaks use cap? Make cloaks use a certain amount of cap relative to the mass of the ship. This way you could make cloaks run for a while on any ship but eventually they would run out of cap unless they severely gimped their fitting and used all cap mods.
I LOVE this idea besides on covert ops frigs. Utterly brilliant. You wouldn't be able to sit in your damned titan cloaked forever until you activate your smartbomb and INSTANTLY leave the system.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 10:57:00 -
[556]
AFK cloaking should be nerfed.
Idea to make cloaked ships scannable, but make it take long time is one of those afk cloaking nerf ideas that appeal me most.
If you want to be in system and need to go away from keyboard then log off. It is not that hard is it.
|
QuantumX
Minmatar
Sicarri Covenant
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 12:17:00 -
[557]
Read the first page of this thread and thought to myself, my god people whining about how cloaks affect their rights to this and that...
Cloaks are about fear, and fear of the unknown.. About the ability of a small ship/fleet to inflict pain on an unsuspecting enemy... If they make the ability for you to scan out a cloaked ship within a few minutes you might has well remove the cloak from the game.
Covert Ops ships should ALWAYS be undetectable by any scanner / probe based means, thats the very definition of their role.
As for combat ships fitting cloaks well many of them take a penalty from them being fited. Perhaps this should be increased, but it should def not be removed as an ability.
I personally use a cloak to pirate i have a scout watching for people, coverts ops usually, and then have a larger killing ships cloaked at a safe ready to attack, if i'm going to attack i offline the cloak, and go to my target and kill it. They go back to my hide hole re-cloak and wait for my next target. Nothing wrong with this, except for the whiners who think its overpowered to do this... Because it violates their rights in their space blahh blahh blahh. But remember its things like this that make EvE exciting..
What the hell is the point if group A can identify a threat from cloaked and inferior force Group B within a few minutes and destroy them with their blob.. Or their "DDDDD" has ccp put it. Makes the game boring, and makes it all about who has the biggest blob of capitals.
As for AFK cloakers, yes I suspect people use it has a protection, by this is simply solved by the introduction by CCP of a AFK logout, and TBH i dont see the introduction of an afk logout has a bad thing, if set to a reasonable about of time, perhaps an 30 mins or 60 even, whatever.... And have the afk logout reset each time a player uses a startgate so that autopilot in empire can still be used perhaps?
anyway my tupence worth of dribble to a thread...
==========================
I came i saw i got blown up!
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 17:15:00 -
[558]
Originally by: Carniflex
AFK cloaking should be nerfed.
Idea to make cloaked ships scannable, but make it take long time is one of those afk cloaking nerf ideas that appeal me most.
If you want to be in system and need to go away from keyboard then log off. It is not that hard is it.
the problem with that is that it tells you where the ship is at the end of the scan meaning that it can easily be abused and makes the active cloaker better off not fiting the cloak for any gang larger than 3 or so
if i put on a mod that is meant to make me stealth and i have to literally be on the run the entire time im there then i aint gonna fit a cloak
what the hell is so hard for you damn people to understand
just cause you didnt train for perfect cloak / dont like it because its not your style does not mean you have to try and nerf the fun for the rest of us
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Adaris
Dark and Light inc.
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 17:39:00 -
[559]
Edited by: Adaris on 17/05/2007 17:39:12
Wow I can't believe this post has not gotton a GM stamp yet! Perhaps they don't know what they want to do either?
I posted here a while ago about my opinion on the matter, which was contrary to the thread title. I got words thrown back at me for it but the people had good points. I have always felt that cloaking was a strong tactical advantage on non-intended scloaking specific ships such as Battleships, and I remain resolute in that opinion. But another thing I had an opinion on was local, I posted in this thread at a time when people were abusing (according to my opinion) cloaks by using them on a multitude of ships to disrupt (allowed ofc) the operations of enemy players on a daily basis 23/7. I was against the afk cloaker, I still am, but this is what I had a problem with. The fact that the hostile to me was afk and in a cloaked BS.
People have said that well how do you know he is afk? I knew because people generally can't spend 23 hours per day vivid and attentive watching their screens probing (or not) while cloaked all that time for days on end without needing sleep. However, I never witnessed them log off, and from a type of pattern that emerged they cloaker would say something when he was back online, as if he had been online, but a bad attempt of covering the truth. I am against this aspect of cloaking. its not supposed to be like that. You are well entitled to disrupt people's gameplay if you are playing as well. Not when you are asleep. Comparing it to the market 9another argument in favour of it) is a poor statement. Cloaking is in a field of its own. I am heppy to see other people agree that afk cloaking is the issue.
But on the topic of local and the proposed cloaker not showing up when cloaked, prior to a few weeks back I was againt this. That would be very unbalanced (given no alternative atm to anti-cloaking) but then some player made a comment somewhere that refreshed my opinion. Your overview is your warning of a cloaked ship. Simple. If he shows up he is coming to attack you if not hes not. simple.
it doesn't solve the matter of afk players abusing cloaking (in terms of them disrupting gaming for 23/7 of other player) 1-2 hours is like no issue. But I just wanted to post considering my change of opinion. I realised that I had not thought of all the perspectives on the issue. And although now my two opinions are directly contrasting of each other, its good to know were I stand.
I wonder if the Devs, and their lack of input here can say the same.
EDIT: Also just to add:
- probing for cloakers.... forget about it, its not supposed to work like that. People are right that thats their function and they should be able to do that. I agree. its the aspect of the:
1.) afk cloaker (23/7 disruption)
2.) afk cloaker in a non-cov ops cloaked ship i.e. BS (23/7 disruption)
3.) cloaker in a non-cov ops cloaked ship
that really **** me off and I consider this abuse.
* * *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euZ0j7vtKEQ
|
Chelone
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 01:58:00 -
[560]
Edited by: Chelone on 18/05/2007 01:56:59
Do you know how large a solar system is? What is ludicrous is that you think no one should be able to HIDE in a freaking SOLAR SYSTEM, even with a CLOAK. You even have LOCAL to tell you they are there! (But that is acceptable based on the concept of neutral Gate-info transmission.) Furthermore, if CCP tries to prevent AFK-anything, people will just make hacks to get around it. That's about the easiest possible thing to hack, faking some kind of random movement.
Cloak should probably use cap. But any ship designed for covops cloak should be able to sustain it indefinitely. If a pilot wants to sit in his ship and play Minesweeper until he gets a target of opportunity, that is completely valid and realistic. Gee here's an idea - if a cloaker "invades" your precious ratting system, LEAVE. Then assign someone to rat in an adjacent system as a scout to see when he gets bored and comes out, and a couple PvPers further down the line who can be alerted to bubble the gate.
You want your little area of 0.0 to be completely safe and secure, with no work on your part, via local and cloak-nerfs and anything else you need for you to be a 0.0 carebear. Well, I already know CCP doesn't share that view of Eve, so tough luck for you. If local isn't enough to make you feel safe at night, try assigning people to watch / rat in your linkage systems. It's not CCP's job to defend your space.
|
|
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 08:46:00 -
[561]
good points
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
QuantumX
Minmatar
Sicarri Covenant
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 09:35:00 -
[562]
Originally by: Chelone
Edited by: Chelone on 18/05/2007 02:12:04
Do you know how large a solar system is? What is ludicrous is that you think no one should be able to HIDE in a freaking SOLAR SYSTEM, even with a CLOAK. You even have LOCAL to tell you they are there! (But that is acceptable based on the concept of neutral Gate-info transmission.) Furthermore, if CCP tries to prevent AFK-anything, people will just make hacks to get around it. That's about the easiest possible thing to hack, faking some kind of random movement.
Cloak should probably use cap. But any ship designed for covops cloak should be able to sustain it indefinitely. If a pilot wants to sit in his ship and play Minesweeper until he gets a target of opportunity, that is completely valid and realistic. Gee here's an idea - if a cloaker "invades" your precious ratting system, LEAVE. Then assign someone to rat in an adjacent system as a scout to see when he gets bored and comes out, and a couple PvPers further down the line who can be alerted to bubble the gate.
You want your little area of 0.0 to be completely safe and secure, with no work on your part, via local and cloak-nerfs and anything else you need for you to be a 0.0 carebear. Well, I already know CCP doesn't share that view of Eve, so tough luck for you. If local isn't enough to make you feel safe at night, try assigning people to watch / rat in your linkage systems. It's not CCP's job to defend your space.
Addendum: I'm not against SOME kind of anti-cloak module - I just think you are being a whining baby about it. I'd like to see something like a tachyon-detection grid ala ST:TNG, that requires something like 15 or more pilots with specialized modules. And when the gang has enough combined tachyon scan strength, they can penetrate any cloak in system. You could even supplement that with tachyon-detection modules anchorable at POS's. So you could make it possible to hunt down cloakers, but make it take some kind of significant team effort to do so.
Here Here.
Well said. |
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente
SecuWay Industrial inc.
SECUWAY.
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 11:25:00 -
[563]
Cloaking is primary a tactical point for fleet ops and the problem with cloakers is very small.
Most of the whiners here, can't fitt cloaking devices so they want nerf it. That's not the way to go for. The primary goal in EVE should be, that a group is working with different ship types together and not as freelancers do. If you aren't able to work together you shouldn't play EVE. A cloaker in a group is dangerous, a cloaker allone is a piece of cake.
|
RuleoftheBone
Minmatar
Veto. Academy
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 12:04:00 -
[564]
After reading 20 pages my head hurts a bit.
I am leaning towards supporting non-covops/recons/ being severely gimped further and being made subject to scan probes when AFK...possibly even when not. This would include cap ships etc...although exclude T2 transports.
Conversely--those pilots that literally spend months training for covops/recons should NOT be punished for being specialists within the game. The covops pilot is only as dangerous as the dogs he can call in on a given target. I think Lexor Slice said it best (and I paraphrase a bit) that "pro" covops pilots don't even mount weapons beyond a bit of emergency EW or a scram. And that they do thier best to stay off KM's as well. I am in complete agreement with Lexor here and consider the covops to essentially be a platform for the recon launcher and intelligence collection. The job is to seek and hide-period. With full rigs and mods despite recent price drops you are still looking IVO 100 million isk worth of frigate that can be instapopped if exposed.
Now the recon guys can pack a hefty punch at a significant risk of exposure due to fragility. Again...I fail to see how a system full of pilots can be SO concerned when:
a)You can see the pilot in local.
b)When you have 30 friends in system what idiot will risk a usually faction-fitted specialist ship for the sake of some crappy kill?
As for this 0.0 alliance POS-based cloak-killer thing-what a totally lame idea EXCEPT again the case of non-specialised covert/recon hulls. Utter rubbish. Look at modern submarine warfare today and consider how nearly impossible it is to find a submarine that wants to stay hidden in enemy territorial waters. And open space is-well-infinitely larger than your average ocean. The alliances can keep thier Titans, Dreads, and chokepoint gatecamps....just leave the covops/recons free to risk exposure by penetrating enemy lines with the existing mechanisms.
"Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way"
General George Patton USA
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 17:01:00 -
[565]
well said
its like making someone train for large turret specialization and then making the ammo infinitely worse than regular ammo 
____ __ ________
_sig below_
the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 18:24:00 -
[566]
Originally by: Goumindong
Quote:
Which would be who again?
You know there's a hostile in your system. You've suspended operations. Who's getting caught off guard in this scenario?
People not paying attention.
Am I the only one with a problem with this statement? We are talking 0.0 and someone is whining that someone "not paying attention" will fall prey to a hunter? 
Comparing the Cloak arguement to Empire/LowSec carebears:
1) Empire hauler gets ganked. Is told "Where is your cover? Have someone protect you".
2) Empire miner gets ganked. Is told "Where is your cover? Have someone protect you".
3) Empire hauler gets ganked. Is told "Don't fly AFK. Pay attention".
4) Player in LowSec mining gets ganked. Is told "Where is your cover? Watch local and scanners and stay aligned and warp when someone comes".
5) Player gets ganked in LowSec mission. Is told "Don't fly alone. Bring friends to protect you".
Etc etc etc. Mind you these are all examples of issues that happen in areas that actually have security. Including the "safest" areas of EvE.
Corp in 0.0 (Warning, 0.0 is supposed to be a DANGEROUS PLACE: There is no security in 0.0 that you or your friends do not bring with you):
1) Whines on forums "We are being attacked and killed by a cloaked ship."
2) Is told "Cloaked ships do less damage than a non-cloaded ship, kill them."
3) Responds "They are too powerful and are attacking our defenseless miners and ratters."
4) Gets told "Where is your cover? Bring friends to protect you"
5) Response? "It costs us too much to protect our ships from someone that might attack"
This is in 0.0?!?!?!?
And they call us CareBears 
<----------->
Factional Warefare:
The LowSec wars which never happened. |
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 18:39:00 -
[567]
Originally by: RuleoftheBone
I am leaning towards supporting non-covops/recons/ being severely gimped further and being made subject to scan probes when AFK...possibly even when not. This would include cap ships etc...although exclude T2 transports.
I could agree this to some extent, but on one condition:
We get "proper" exploration vessels. As it is without a cloak you are a sitting duck doing exploration anywhere but HighSec without a cloak. You spend far too long searching, dropping probes (which are detectable), etc. Plus the only ships that get a bonus to Astrometrics are FRIGATES.
For stealth/Covert Ops we would then have: CovertOps frigates and Recon cruisers.
For exploration we would have: Exploration Frigates, Cruisers and BCs.
Reduce their potential firepower (like 1/2 the turret/launcher slots of that ship class so they aren't a great "threat" to poor undefended 0.0 Corps and Alliances), give them high defenses/resistances (so they can actually enter a Exploration site and survive), bonus to Astrometrics (10% scan time bonus) analyzing and hacking (all of those are role bonuses), and ability to use the Covert Ops cloak (so they can get to where they need to get). Make their skills similar to CovOps frigs and Recon cruisers in difficulty to fly, time and skill wise.
Until we have something like that then Exploration is out of the question in non-controlled space if you can't mount a cloak on the ship you will enter the complex in or if that ship can be probed out.
<----------->
Factional Warefare:
The LowSec wars which never happened. |
RuleoftheBone
Minmatar
Veto. Academy
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 19:42:00 -
[568]
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Originally by: RuleoftheBone
I am leaning towards supporting non-covops/recons/ being severely gimped further and being made subject to scan probes when AFK...possibly even when not. This would include cap ships etc...although exclude T2 transports.
I could agree this to some extent, but on one condition:
We get "proper" exploration vessels. As it is without a cloak you are a sitting duck doing exploration anywhere but HighSec without a cloak. You spend far too long searching, dropping probes (which are detectable), etc. Plus the only ships that get a bonus to Astrometrics are FRIGATES.
For stealth/Covert Ops we would then have: CovertOps frigates and Recon cruisers.
For exploration we would have: Exploration Frigates, Cruisers and BCs.
Reduce their potential firepower (like 1/2 the turret/launcher slots of that ship class so they aren't a great "threat" to poor undefended 0.0 Corps and Alliances), give them high defenses/resistances (so they can actually enter a Exploration site and survive), bonus to Astrometrics (10% scan time bonus) analyzing and hacking (all of those are role bonuses), and ability to use the Covert Ops cloak (so they can get to where they need to get). Make their skills similar to CovOps frigs and Recon cruisers in difficulty to fly, time and skill wise.
Until we have something like that then Exploration is out of the question in non-controlled space if you can't mount a cloak on the ship you will enter the complex in or if that ship can be probed out.
First this:
"its like making someone train for large turret specialization and then making the ammo infinitely worse than regular ammo"
Not really a good comparison. The amount of support skills required once a player makes the choice to specialise in covops/recons is in the region of 6 months dedicated training time for covops and up to a year for recons....
As for proper exploration vessels...guess what? Covops frigates handle that job as well if desired and fitted as such. You are proposing duplicating the same class of ships. And if I understand the intent of exploration ingame correctly CCP has designed it in a way to encourage teamwork. Covops or one of the dedicated astrometric-bonussed frigs (which I have seen fitted with prototypes cloaks...poor mans covops) find the site and call in backup to do whatever it is the explorers do at these sites.
Exploration appears rampant as far as I can tell. I see Herons etc dropping probes left and right in both 0.0 and Empire space. My former alliance mates have a lot of fun doing it to...as a team.
Look....CCP is already moving towards eliminating traditional belts and making them hidden. Which is silly and defies celestial mechanics anyway (is our RL solar systems asteroid belt hidden? ). After 20 pages of back and forth it's about time CCP stepped up and commented directly on the subject in a clear manner. The more I think about it the more appealing my commentary sounds to me--no more silly cloaked AFK Ravens (sorry Burn Eden  ), cloaked Titans (sorry alliances) and other such nonsense like POS detection fields. As if the borked POS system needs any more complexity and server resources.
CCP-for once don't be Clinton-like and try to satisfy everyone. Make the call and tell us what your plans are on this matter already. You folks have your own ideas along with 20 pages of both intelligent suggestions and commentary. Time to let the cat out of the bag and let the pilots who dedicated months of training time (note-past the estimated sub churn time of 6-7 months) know where they stand.
"Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way"
General George Patton USA
|
Xordus
Beasts of Burden
YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 19:48:00 -
[569]
Sure afk cloakers in home systems are a problem but my biggest concern is with Ravens!!! Seriously, try to catch a ratting raven in 0.0.
Already we got the nerf where said Raven pilot sees you're hostile the second you enter local, so as soon as you come in he goes through his well-worn routine. Click warp to ss... cloak. WOW!!! That took some skill, and now he's totally invulnerable.
Now as far as risk and reward... that seems a bit stupid. He gets to sit in a system all day long, killing spawn after spawn, making millions after millions, and as soon as there's a threat within 20 seconds he's completely invulnerable....
ATLEAST make him probable. ATLEAST!!
|
Rylet VanDorn
Pastafarians
Novus Ordos Seclorum
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 20:02:00 -
[570]
Actually the answer to this is real simple, and could be easily changed in the game.
Give all cloaks a duration without auto-repeat (like scan probe launchers), rather than toggle.
Covops cloak = 15 minute activation time.
Tech 2 Cloak = 10 minute activation time.
Tech 1 cloak = 5 minute activation time.
That way people uncloak for as long as their re-charge time is (about 3 seconds on a covops frig) and then have to actually PRESS THE BUTTON to re-cloak.
If it's a concern, you can even give covops frigates a ship bonus providing 1000% cloak activation time.
It gets rid of AFKers, prevents a cloak from being total immunity (since you uncloak for a couple seconds, enough time to be locked), yet the module still provides the intended bonus.
Can people still sit cloaked in your space? Technically, yes. At least they can't go AFK while doing it though.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 27 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |