EVE Search - Solution to AFK Cloakers?

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Solution to AFK Cloakers?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6749	Posted - 2017.07.17 04:21:14 - [1] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: All cloaking modules to have a new cap drain amount attribute, once cloak is activated, cap depletes and eventually runs out and decloaks? any cap regen/ bonus mods are negated whilst cloaked, so that people cant just fill up on cap regen mods to overcome this. wouldn't this just be an easy, simple fix? You KNOW there is a dedicated thread for this and you post like a completely blinkered m0r0n? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6749	Posted - 2017.07.17 04:23:54 - [2] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: There's no consensus that AFK cloakers are a problem. Better start with establishing that before you start coming up with a solution. That aside, I doubt we can expect Big Things from you if you weren't bright enough to find the sticky thread. Oh he saw the sticky thread, even has some posts there. This person is really, really, really stupid. That's all. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6750	Posted - 2017.07.17 19:57:38 - [3] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: You are making assumptions as to their motives. Often, Killing Ships is secondary. Perhaps they want to guage how easy it would be to take the system. perhaps they simply want to degrade the value of the system. And pray tell...how are they going to make this determination IF THEY ARE AFK? If there is nobody there they can't gather much intel now can they. If they want to degrade the value of the system they have to stop you from utilizing that system. That can be countered. Ratting in a group, mining in a group. Having both going on at the same time so one group can support the other. Quote: The whole point of the AFK camp is that you can't outsmart it--- they aren't even at the keyboard most of the time, so there's nothing to outsmart unless you think it's totally fair that sneaking in one alt a week ago then pressing the cloak button is equal effort to forcing everyone to stay at maximum readiness at all times until he decides to attack. If they aren't at the keyboard then what is the problem? Oh right, you can't tell and that level of uncertainty means you have absolutely zero recourse. None at all. You can't rat in a group and switch up your fit to be more pvp combat effective. Nope, in fact the fitting window no longer works once an AFK camper is in system. Quote: And if he does not? Oh well, time and effort wasted preparing for nothing, he wins. Or you can move out and leave the space to him uncontested. He wins again. Or you could rat in a group in fleet. Quote: He is able to force and extremely assymetical form of warfare on you, with no way to counter it but fly stupid. For some, that's acceptable, but not everyone is stupid. How is flying in a fleet of PvP ships and ratting stupid if you have an AFK cloaker there? If you own an entire region how is moving systems stupid? It is unlikely they are going to take just one system...and hey, if they do fantastic now I can get in a fleet and have a fight. The real problem here is, Mike, you simply want to rat as if you were playing on Sisi...frankly you should just rat there. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6750	Posted - 2017.07.17 20:20:09 - [4] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: Cindy the Sewer wrote: Congrats, you have submiited an idea that has been submitted 999,999 times before and so we hit the millionth time mark! btw.... YOU: Dear CCP, i have a great anti-camper idea ! CCP: Whatever it is the answer is NO ! Can you show me links to my particular idea please? I mean i could read every post in a 496 page thread, but you know I have a life, unlike yourself obviously, and really really dont have the time because RL > Eve. Oh i know, that's crazy right. See you didnt post here to be helpful, what you did was post to try give yourself some troll epeen. Sad really that people need to do that to gain attention but meh.. Oh and for the record, no i dont agree with your views Oh for FFS...you do know about this thing called google right? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=396348&find=unread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1682517#post1682517 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3359691#post3359691 "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6750	Posted - 2017.07.18 04:01:02 - [5] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: So go ahead, kill the campers. You admit yourself that they are still there. You haven't outsmarted them. You have allowed them to degrade the value of your systems by forcing you to fly compromised fits in case they attack. So you were doing that already? Good for you, though it's too bad you can't protect your space and improve it's value. Find your backbone. Get in a fleet with PvP fit ships, and rat away, mine away. Both ideally so each fleet can come to the aid of the other. Get on voice comms. Look at killboards when are they active. Look at the map and see if there is a system with people in it and go check it out. If anyone has alts bring logi, have them logged in with additional support. For the love of God some crying to CCP to fix your problems. You are an adult...well at least technically...so act like it. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6751	Posted - 2017.07.18 17:17:30 - [6] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Mike Voidstar wrote: So go ahead, kill the campers. You admit yourself that they are still there. You haven't outsmarted them. You have allowed them to degrade the value of your systems by forcing you to fly compromised fits in case they attack. So you were doing that already? Good for you, though it's too bad you can't protect your space and improve it's value. Find your backbone. Get in a fleet with PvP fit ships, and rat away, mine away. Both ideally so each fleet can come to the aid of the other. Get on voice comms. Look at killboards when are they active. Look at the map and see if there is a system with people in it and go check it out. If anyone has alts bring logi, have them logged in with additional support. For the love of God some crying to CCP to fix your problems. You are an adult...well at least technically...so act like it. Yeah i mean i guess when its you guys (and i mean goons) cloaking camping (its funny how you keep disputing the problem isnt it), which you do a lot, its ok right? I mean everyone can fight against 50 caps that jump in through cynos right? I mean you fought of all the alliances that kicked your ass in WWB right? Oh wait no you didnt. Stpo being ridiculous. The problem is, if we want to get down to it, is the ability to cyno in caps/sub caps instantly. Thats the problem for people. When you can cyno in 100,200 + ships thats the problem, not being prepared to get in a fleet. There are always cloaky campers in many of our systems. There are people coming through in cloaks all the time as well. But it is rare to see a Goon here crying about it. Deal with it. Stop asking CCP to solve your problems when you have the ability to solve them yourself. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6751	Posted - 2017.07.18 17:19:30 - [7] - Quote Scialt wrote: Donnachadh wrote: Scialt wrote: I can't think of a valid reason why being logged on without moving your mouse or hitting a keyboard key every 20 minutes would be necessary. Then you sir are a complete failure, or you lack any ability to visualize how or why this may be needed so here are a few that come to mind virtually instantly. Emergency cyno alts. Dodging a war dec. Watching a worm hole entrance / exit. Watching a structure for signs of activity when day tripping into a worm hole. And let's not forget one of my personal favorites, making a bunch of big tough nul sec players like you cower in a corner and act like a bunch of scared children. All of those things can still be done with a toon where you you open up your character sheet or evemail or just click in a chat window without actually doing anything that takes you out of cloak once every 20 minutes. If you're at your keyboard, ESPECIALLY if you're actually watching the screen... when a popup comes up that says "you have been inactive and will be logged out in 2 minutes" it is very easy to do some meaningless activity to cancel the logout. If you're playing the game (even on another screen) an afk logout timer has no real impact on you at all. It only impacts you if you're not actually at your computer. Most games do this already. Why waste system resources on a player who's not there? As for me personally... I'm not overly concerned about AFK campers. I fly cheap crap... if some long term AFK guy wants to drop on my 100m ratting VNI... oh well. I just would rather play a mmo with players who are actually at their keyboards. Guess I'm odd that way. And I can set up something to do it for me. As it does not allow me to acquire any advantage other than staying logged in, it is not in violation of the EULA. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6753	Posted - 2017.07.18 21:35:58 - [8] - Quote Scialt wrote: I could be wrong but I had always thought any botting was a violation of the EULA "under any circumstances." You are incorrect. Here is the relevant portion, Quote: You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. By simply being logged in I do not acquire any items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at all, let alone at an accelerated rate relative to ordinary game play. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6754	Posted - 2017.07.19 19:00:14 - [9] - Quote Scialt wrote: "Why do I have to increase my efforts simply because you want to be safer in an area of space that is not supposed to be safe to start with." I don't really care about the safety... I prefer to actually play a MMO with other actual PEOPLE rather than an empty chair. I'm fine with you dropping on me. I enjoy the risk of EVE. I just want the other characters to be PRESENT. I don't think that's a big ask. "Why do I have to increase my efforts when you cannot or will not put forth the effort to simply move to another system to get away from me?" What effort? I just want you to be present. Heck, ideally activity in ANY eve window open would satisfy the activity for all. I don't care what you do... I just want to play a game with other players. Not your empty chair. I'm good with both evading droppers and baiting them... but it's freaking annoying to try to do that when there isn't an actual person on the other side. [snip] How do you know the chair is empty? It is not uncommon for people to be logged in on multiple accounts. They might be quite active on on account, providing lots of interaction with the client, but on the other...nothing. That other account might be an emergency cyno. It could be an account monitoring a market. It could be a scout logged in and watching for hostile activity. These are all valid and allowed. Why should they be subject to a 20 minute rule because you want to get rid of AFK cloakers? As for increased effort now the person has to be sure to provide input to those clients. Yes, it sounds trivial, but there will be times when "people in the chair" are logged off because they were busy with another client. And why are you not posting this in the sticky thread and keeping this thread alive? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6754	Posted - 2017.07.19 21:12:45 - [10] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: How do you know the chair is empty? It is not uncommon for people to be logged in on multiple accounts. They might be quite active on on account, providing lots of interaction with the client, but on the other...nothing. That other account might be an emergency cyno. It could be an account monitoring a market. It could be a scout logged in and watching for hostile activity. These are all valid and allowed. Why should they be subject to a 20 minute rule because you want to get rid of AFK cloakers? As for increased effort now the person has to be sure to provide input to those clients. Yes, it sounds trivial, but there will be times when "people in the chair" are logged off because they were busy with another client. And why are you not posting this in the sticky thread and keeping this thread alive? Again... I want to ensure the chair is full. I don't know if it's empty or not. So your solution is to log off those chairs that are not empty? Here is a test I use when discussing game play issues: If you adversely impact those not causing the problem you are trying to address your suggested fix is a bad one. I suggest your solution is a bad one as it will logoff "chairs that are not empty." And you know...you can always use the sticky thread like you are supposed too. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6755	Posted - 2017.07.19 22:40:52 - [11] - Quote Sonya Corvinus wrote: Scialt wrote: Again... I want to ensure the chair is full. I don't know if it's empty or not. But I want to make sure that if I take the time to fit out a bait porpoise to try to lure a cloaked intruder into tackling/dropping on me... I want to have some kind of assurance that there is potential for me to actually get dropped on. Making sure someone is actually sitting in the chair does that. I don't want to get rid of AFK cloakers. I want to get rid of all AFK players so I know that the players I see in game are actually present. As for an accidental logoff... again.. .who cares? They can log back in as soon as they get back to the screen to look at it. You can have a count down that displays (similar to the "safe logoff" option) that occurs if you reach the end of the timer so if they have the screen up for looking at but not interacting they can easily cancel it. Again... I want to play MMO's with other people... not empty chairs. I don't need an internet connection to play a game with empty chairs. And as to why I'm posting here... you're asking for responses here. If you don't want a response... don't make a post asking me questions. So my character that does nothing but exploration in deep nullsec/WHs and hasn't docked in three months can't log in and just chat with corpmates without being disconnected every 20 minutes? I believe that chatting via the client is allowed...chatting say via Slack, Trillian, or some other medium while logged in and periodically glancing at your screen for whatever reason is forbidden and you'll be logged off. Just be glad you aren't banned for such corrosive behavior! [/sarcasm] "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 15:40:01 - [12] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: How do you know the chair is empty? It is not uncommon for people to be logged in on multiple accounts. They might be quite active on on account, providing lots of interaction with the client, but on the other...nothing. That other account might be an emergency cyno. It could be an account monitoring a market. It could be a scout logged in and watching for hostile activity. These are all valid and allowed. Why should they be subject to a 20 minute rule because you want to get rid of AFK cloakers? As for increased effort now the person has to be sure to provide input to those clients. Yes, it sounds trivial, but there will be times when "people in the chair" are logged off because they were busy with another client. And why are you not posting this in the sticky thread and keeping this thread alive? Again... I want to ensure the chair is full. I don't know if it's empty or not. So your solution is to log off those chairs that are not empty? Here is a test I use when discussing game play issues: If you adversely impact those not causing the problem you are trying to address your suggested fix is a bad one. I suggest your solution is a bad one as it will logoff "chairs that are not empty." And you know...you can always use the sticky thread like you are supposed too. No, if the chair is not empty, the person wouldn't be logged off. Your basic idea is this. You have multiple sessions up. You see the flashing "You are afk and will be logged off in two minutes due to inactivity" message. You hear an audible clue that indicates one of your sessions is about to be logged off. You're still going to do nothing let the session be logged off... and whine about it? If that's the case... the player's brain being empty is just as much a problem as the chair being empty. They were being told that a session was about to be logged and chose not to do anything. Either that or they didn't notice... which is effectively the SAME as the chair being empty. That session had no human mind doing anything with it or even watching it. It's an empty chair either way. Why on earth are you so set on being able to stay logged in on an account you are not playing, are not looking and are not even listening for audible alerts from? That session is an empty chair. Log it to use it when you want to... you know... USE IT. There's no adverse impact. At all. You can still log into an account when you need to use it. And if you're not using it... there's no need to keep it logged in. Nothing is preventing you from using as many accounts as you like... as long as you USE THEM. Your definition of being adversely impacted is incredibly petty. And if you want to whine about the sticky thread... feel free to reply to me there. I'm responding to your comments. My response is going to go where the comments are made. If you me to quit responding to you here... don't post here. Or quit moaning about the sticky thread if you aren't willing to post your responses there. I have 3 accounts. I often run all three at the same time. I have 2 monitors, inevitably that means one of them will "underneath" one of the other two sessions. So yes, you will log out non-empty chairs with this "solution". And frankly, I find it just silly to log out people who are not ATK simply because it somehow causes you some sort of mental angst that somebody may not be sitting in their chair at that precise moment you want to interact with them. As I noted before, being logged in is not even necessary to have an impact on the game...why should be logged in and AFK be a big deal? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 15:46:53 - [13] - Quote Scialt wrote: Donnachadh wrote: Scialt wrote: No, if the chair is not empty, the person wouldn't be logged off. Must be nice to live such a simple life in EvE that running afoul of an auto log off timer will never be an issue, unfortunately that is not the so for all of us. One last go at getting you to understand. On another character I am a logi pilot for a low sec corp besides tracking my own fleet and their need for reps I have other duties that include but are not limited too Watching for opposing fleet members that warp out, the general direction they warped too and then passing that information and the character name to our scouts so they can start the search for them. Keeping track of the opposing fleets ships that have been killed by type and by character that was flying them and relying that info to the FC when they ask for it. Watching the immediate battle area for ships that may have slipped past the scouts usually but not always these are ships that were cloaked when they came in. And the list goes on. All of this adds up to the simple reality that it may be 20 - 30 minutes or more between chances to interact with that emergency cyno character sitting cloaked up somewhere. And yet even though I am sitting in my chair and extremely active in game, myself and my corp mates have to risk loss of ships because of your idiotic auto log off timer? Just go away with this idea it has no place here in EvE. So... your entire argument is now limited to.... an emergency cyno character. So let's delve into that. You have an account that is not being used that you want to be sitting in space and it's too much work for you to simply click on the window or alt-tab over to the client for that character once in a 20 minute window to keep it from logging off. You honestly don't have time for a single click in 20 minutes? Whining about having to click a window once every 20 minutes frankly sounds weaker than whining about wanting to ensure that actual players are present when you see a character in game. I will say that my fleet combat experience doesn't reach the larger TiDi fights... but most of mine have a pretty meaningful amount of downtime, regardless of if I'm running logistics, scouting or flying a main-line ship. I mostly use my second account to have something to do during those downtimes. I can't think of a time where I didn't click over to that screen over a 20 minute period. If I have time to click over and adjust market entries while in a small 10-man fleet, I assume that the larger slower moving fleets would have even more time to kill. It literally takes less than a second to alt-tab to your other account, click the chat window and alt-tab back. Or watching the market. Last night I had a character logged in and I'd put up buy orders. I was reading and writing some stuff in another window and periodically looked over. Generally my attention was focused on what I was reading and writing though. Could have been logged off? Yup. Would it be critical? No. Would it be annoying? Yes. Is this a good change? Not in this case. How about using an alt cloaked watching over a station for hostile activity...same thing. Attention might be focused elsewhere. Would it be critical if such a character was logged out? Quite possibly. Would it be annoying, fook yeah. You have tried to cover the cyno alt, but you assume that one's attention will not be "captured" at a critical moment. Again having such a character logged out could be of critical importance and all to make you feel better about playing the game. Imposing a cost on other players for your benefit is not really good game design. Such a thing should be eschewed as much as possible. These are just some examples I have come up with. Might there be others? Sure. My failure to find all examples of where this would impose a cost on others does not mean they do not exist (doesn't mean they do either). But you have made zero effort to think of your own examples and want to dismiss examples with a casual handwave. Sorry, your idea is bad, your attempt to support it is bad. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 15:50:11 - [14] - Quote I also have to ask what is gained here? Nothing really. Suppose I am logged in and AFK, can you interact with me or I with you? No. Suppose I am auto logged off, can you interact with me or I with you? No. At best you can say that, there is a higher proportion of players logged in who are not AFK. But you can interact with them already. So again...nothing is gained unless you are trying to interact with random players this will likely have little to any impact on how people play the game. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 15:54:27 - [15] - Quote Scialt wrote: Putting your screen in the background and never interacting with the client after log on... is not. How nice of you to define activity to support your position. I submit that sitting in my chair, chatting with others via trillian and periodically glancing at my client to see if a market order is completed is activity. Considering that poeple logged in can influence the game, at least in a small way, allowing people to be logged in and not interacting with the client at a frequency you deem appropriate is not your call to make. Stop trying to micro-manage other people's time in game. If somebody needs to wait out a jump fatigue timer and they want to go AFK, that is not a big deal. Logging them off to suit your pleasure when you might be on the other side of the map or may never ever interact with them anyways is just foolishness. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 20:36:36 - [16] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: I also have to ask what is gained here? Nothing really. Suppose I am logged in and AFK, can you interact with me or I with you? No. Suppose I am auto logged off, can you interact with me or I with you? No. At best you can say that, there is a higher proportion of players logged in who are not AFK. But you can interact with them already. So again...nothing is gained unless you are trying to interact with random players this will likely have little to any impact on how people play the game. It saves me the time from TRYING to interact with you but having no actual chance of interaction because you are AFK. I like trying bait a cloaked dropper. I do not like wasting hours of effort trying to bait an empty chair. Either way you gain information...so what...you should have things made easier for you? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 20:44:32 - [17] - Quote Li Soikutsu wrote: Time to fix this nonsense already .... just check how much the threat has been viewed should be a clear sign it's a problem.. No matter what arguments you make having influence in a MMO while being AFK should never be possible. In activity timer for X amount of time before save log off............ problem fixed. YOU ARE WELCOME Seriously? That is the best you got, lots of people have looked at this thread? It tells you nothing of what the views are on the issue of those looking at the thread. The problem is you cannot tell when a player is AFK or not. And given the nature of EVE relative to other games you will be logging off ATK players. Why would you want to do that? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 20:48:42 - [18] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Scialt wrote: Putting your screen in the background and never interacting with the client after log on... is not. How nice of you to define activity to support your position. I submit that sitting in my chair, chatting with others via trillian and periodically glancing at my client to see if a market order is completed is activity. Considering that poeple logged in can influence the game, at least in a small way, allowing people to be logged in and not interacting with the client at a frequency you deem appropriate is not your call to make. Stop trying to micro-manage other people's time in game. If somebody needs to wait out a jump fatigue timer and they want to go AFK, that is not a big deal. Logging them off to suit your pleasure when you might be on the other side of the map or may never ever interact with them anyways is just foolishness. Edit: I will also note: It is nice to see you finally admit you'll log off non-empty chairs. Of course it would have been nice if you simply admitted this up front. It's not activity. Activity means taking an action. So to be active in a game means to take action in the game. This isn't some odd personal definition... it's what the word means. If you take no action in the client... you are not active in the game... and thus are not showing activity. Yes... I might be active in real life... but I'm not in the game.... because I've taken NO ACTIONS IN THE GAME. Brushing my teeth is an activity... but not in the game. Are you really not able to understand this? Or are you just trying to parse words to avoid the actual topic? As for the rest of your rather comical defense of "playing a game without actually playing"... I just can't comprehend that concept. I can't see how a logged in account that you never click on and can't be bothered to click on if a message pops up about being logged off for lack of activity is anything other than an "empty chair". It behaves the exact same way an empty chair would if it were running the eve client. Again... for me a multiple player game must have an actual player involved... not an empty chair (or a player who is sitting in the chair but refuses to hit their keyboard or move the mouse or in any way interact with the client). Whatever, I say it is activity. Looking to see if a buy order is complete, looking to see if some people are undocking is activity. You want to define activity to suit the outcome you want. Making players sit and have to periodically do stuff and make their game experience worse to make your game experience better does not strike me as reasonable...especially when many of those players made worse off are not responsible for the issue you are trying to deal with. You should not be nerfing the game play of those who are not causing the problem. Why are you not understanding this point? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.20 20:50:44 - [19] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Scialt wrote: Putting your screen in the background and never interacting with the client after log on... is not. How nice of you to define activity to support your position. I submit that sitting in my chair, chatting with others via trillian and periodically glancing at my client to see if a market order is completed is activity. Considering that poeple logged in can influence the game, at least in a small way, allowing people to be logged in and not interacting with the client at a frequency you deem appropriate is not your call to make. Stop trying to micro-manage other people's time in game. If somebody needs to wait out a jump fatigue timer and they want to go AFK, that is not a big deal. Logging them off to suit your pleasure when you might be on the other side of the map or may never ever interact with them anyways is just foolishness. Edit: I will also note: It is nice to see you finally admit you'll log off non-empty chairs. Of course it would have been nice if you simply admitted this up front. It's not activity. Activity means taking an action. So to be active in a game means to take action in the game. This isn't some odd personal definition... it's what the word means. If you take no action in the client... you are not active in the game... and thus are not showing activity. Yes... I might be active in real life... but I'm not in the game.... because I've taken NO ACTIONS IN THE GAME. Brushing my teeth is an activity... but not in the game. Are you really not able to understand this? Or are you just trying to parse words to avoid the actual topic? As for the rest of your rather comical defense of "playing a game without actually playing"... I just can't comprehend that concept. I can't see how a logged in account that you never click on and can't be bothered to click on if a message pops up about being logged off for lack of activity is anything other than an "empty chair". It behaves the exact same way an empty chair would if it were running the eve client. Again... for me a multiple player game must have an actual player involved... not an empty chair (or a player who is sitting in the chair but refuses to hit their keyboard or move the mouse or in any way interact with the client). Here...suppose you go and buy something on the market. Are you interacting with the other player? Yes. Is that player even logged in? Maybe not. Yes, you can interact with players not logged in. Why so butthurt about a player logged in but not being as active as you like? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.21 04:07:26 - [20] - Quote Li Soikutsu wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Li Soikutsu wrote: Time to fix this nonsense already .... just check how much the threat has been viewed should be a clear sign it's a problem.. No matter what arguments you make having influence in a MMO while being AFK should never be possible. In activity timer for X amount of time before save log off............ problem fixed. YOU ARE WELCOME Seriously? That is the best you got, lots of people have looked at this thread? It tells you nothing of what the views are on the issue of those looking at the thread. The problem is you cannot tell when a player is AFK or not. And given the nature of EVE relative to other games you will be logging off ATK players. Why would you want to do that? Not having any input in the game for X amount of time is AFK, Only thing AFK campers do anyways is trolling the forums trying to telll ppl AFK camping is OK... It's NOT. I don't AFK camp. So much for that theory then...you can go back under your bridge. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.21 04:09:34 - [21] - Quote Li Soikutsu wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: Li Soikutsu wrote: Not having any input in the game for X amount of time is AFK, Only thing AFK campers do anyways is trolling the forums trying to telll ppl AFK camping is OK... It's NOT. You're a special one aren't you. I can chat in team speak whilst docked or at a safe whilst people have a break and eat food. Now I have to click away an obnoxious flashy thing because some nullbears are afraid of their own shadow? No thanks. I don't afk cloak either. Yes if you go AFK you better click that button or get logged off considering you ain't playing anyways. Also I never put a time on the best idea ever AFK timer popup.. let's make it 69 minutes.. if you do not have any ingame activities for 69 minutes not a single click or keystroke you should get a pop windows that you will be safe logged. And I really don't get how that's a problem considering no one was playing the game anyways. People who are logged off can "play" in that they have an impact on the game. Why so butthurt over people you suspect of being AFK? Or are you all sitting there going, "Wait...what is Teckos talking about? I don't want to call him a liar as it looks soooo much like a tarp."? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.21 04:10:56 - [22] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: The ui should never get in the way of the player, let alone log them off. Doesn't matter if its 23.45 hours. Afk people do not take up server resources, they dont harm anyone and they don't gain anything. There is no reason to forcefully log anyone off except for downtime. Well technically there was that one AFK carrier pilot who was jumped by a gang of bombers and by the time he got back from wherever his geckos had wiped out most of the stealth bombers.... But that is the exception that proves the rule, IMO. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6756	Posted - 2017.07.21 06:34:18 - [23] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: If the OP had posted in the correct thread and this discussion carried out in the appropriate place, the AFK cloaking thread would be over page 500 now. That would at least have been an achievement rather just him starting another go-nowhere thread where players whine about something CCP is well aware of. CCP knows some people don't like cloaky camping and want something proactive they can do against a cloaked scout. CCP wants there to be risk in nullsec so they can't just nerf cloaks making the apex group near invulnerable. These conflicting interests are not simple to resolve. I have no doubt this is on the midterm roadmap and will finally get addressed at some point, but it is not going to be by the sinplistic call to nerf cloaks or the ability to stay logged into the game (seriously people?) that self-interested nullbears have been spewing for years. Nullsec is seriously off-course at this point. Despite the lion's share of ISK and minerals being given to nullsec, there is very little conflict flowing from that. Lack of scarcity, and too much safety in part provided by the free and perfect intel of local, has turned nullsec into a farming zone where everyone spends their time just fortifying their space and turbo-farming resources that are having a deleterious effect on the economy to the point some players are being pushed out of the game because they can no longer compete. I don't know what can be done to realize their game vision, but I do know that CCP isn't going to make a change that only would make the nullbears even safer and reduce the chance of conflict even more. Any one who spills tears on the forum asking them to has no understanding of how the game is suppose to work. See....this is why you guys should post in the sticky thread...so Black Pedro does not come along and make everyone feel dumb. You silly buggers. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 18:03:51 - [24] - Quote Scialt wrote: Donnachadh wrote: Scialt wrote: I just would rather play a mmo with players who are actually at their keyboards. Guess I'm odd that way. My mom was watching as I was reading through this thread again last night and she latched onto this specific comment. Her response was simple, elegant and it takes no effort from CCP AND if you take the advice WE do not have to deal with this idiotic auto log off timer. And so I quote her directly. "He simply needs to consider ALL cloaked ships to be an active player, that would solve his problems." Leave it to a 95 year that does not play computer games to come up with the easy solution. But you know she is right and this should be an easy task since there is no way for you to know for sure if a cloaked ship has an AFK player behind it or not. I do treat all cloaked ships as active. I find it annoying when I go through the trouble of doing that and NOBODY IS FREAKING THERE. See my point? I'm TRYING to give you target. I WANT you to shoot at my ship. I'm actively trying to play a multiplayer game with other players. I am making every effort to create content. But I have no chance because you're too busy chatting with your mom to freaking click on your client once ever 20 minutes. I'm glad you're chatting with your mom. Log off first so I'm not wasting my time trying to interact with an empty chair. Or maybe he is and he is just not taking the bait. See that is the thing, AFK cloaking injects uncertainty into the game. Is he there...is he not there. Is he a threat or not? It is not so easy to quantify. You have to work at it. Working as it should, IMO. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 18:06:36 - [25] - Quote Scialt wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: The ui should never get in the way of the player, let alone log them off. Doesn't matter if its 23.45 hours. Afk people do not take up server resources, they dont harm anyone and they don't gain anything. There is no reason to forcefully log anyone off except for downtime. I've never seen Eve's code... but I have a hard time believing that a player logged in does not impact server resources. It may be a small enough impact to not matter, but a player simply being in a system will have some actual impact on the performance of others in the system, even if they are doing nothing. Any time you do something in the game that requires the server to report back to your client on the other players present... the number of said players will impact the time taken for that call. CCP can tell us that having 1000 AFK cloaked ships in a system has a negligible impact and I'm going to believe them. If they say it has no impact I'm going to try to get them to show me their code so I can figure out how to do that trick in my work. Suppose you have 2,000 people in system. Having 1 guy AFK is not going to cause a problem, the other 1,999 doing stuff...yeah they are going to cause a "problems". Removing that 1 AFK guy...won't help the 1,999 guys. The marginal impact is minuscule both because you still have 1,999 guys in system and because that guy you logged off...he wasn't doing anything anyways. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 18:16:00 - [26] - Quote Scialt wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Whatever, I say it is activity. Looking to see if a buy order is complete, looking to see if some people are undocking is activity. You want to define activity to suit the outcome you want. Making players sit and have to periodically do stuff and make their game experience worse to make your game experience better does not strike me as reasonable...especially when many of those players made worse off are not responsible for the issue you are trying to deal with. You should not be nerfing the game play of those who are not causing the problem. Why are you not understanding this point? Because it's not a point. This reminds me of Bill Clinton's impeachment. "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." You're trying to define activity as not taking an action in the game. Not taking an action = no activity. I'm frankly concerned how many Eve players think playing the game involves... not ever touching their keyboard or mouse. You want to define activity as doing something in the client. According to your definition if you are in your chair, and you click on your guns, and then it takes 5 minutes for them to cycle through all their ammo and you have to click again...in that 5 minutes you are NOT playing. I'm sorry that is just stupid. And you want this definition because it suits your argument against AFK cloakers. Regarding this.... Quote: I'm frankly concerned how many Eve players think playing the game involves... not ever touching their keyboard or mouse. Yeah, I'm not going to start telling other players, "Hey, you aren't sandboxing correctly!" "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 18:17:18 - [27] - Quote Li Soikutsu wrote: Think in the end it's just a matter of opinion .. some consider it bullshit for a AFK player to have any impact on the game others disagree. I think we pretty much discussed everthing there can be when it comes to this topic or the 400+ pages one Guess we will have to wait and see who CCP agree's with and how or if they are going to balance this thing out. Players not logged in have an impact on the game. Players using autopilot (often AFK) can have an impact on the game. And these are by design. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 18:19:11 - [28] - Quote Greylord Kane wrote: Well exactly right? If they purposely log a character on and go AFK for prolonged periods of time. Either they had way to much milk products and they are plugged up or they are purposely grieffing a system.... other wise they'd be on and active. Maybe they should just do away with cloaking period. .lol wouldn't that be interesting. You do know we are playing a sandbox game? Log in and do what you want....unless it is approved by some subset of players who have set themselves up to determine what is and is not appropriate in the sandbox. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.21 21:51:04 - [29] - Quote Greylord Kane wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Greylord Kane wrote: Well exactly right? If they purposely log a character on and go AFK for prolonged periods of time. Either they had way to much milk products and they are plugged up or they are purposely grieffing a system.... other wise they'd be on and active. Maybe they should just do away with cloaking period. .lol wouldn't that be interesting. You do know we are playing a sandbox game? Log in and do what you want....unless it is approved by some subset of players who have set themselves up to determine what is and is not appropriate in the sandbox. Mmmm I would debate sandbox game as I have played many of those. I'm pretty sure AFK Camping is not a design that CCP was going for. Cloaky active camping (totally different) and surely acceptable. It is not game play when someone logs on and leaves all day a character logged in and is not actually behind the keyboard active. The motive behind that (AFK Camping) is griefing. Point in case. There is no other reason to do it. By balancing out this, it keeps active cloak alert and active, but also deals with the griefing. I'm all for hot drops, sneaking up, cloaking, and like active events. But not for people intentionally griefing. Again, that does not matter. What CCP was going for is not really the issue. CCP gives us this "universe" and they give us various things in game so we can interact. What and how we use them is not up to them. CCP only steps in if they see something as threatening to game balance. AFK camping is not game breaking. AFK camping is not griefing. That particular line of attack against AFK camping has been tried dozens of times all to no avail. In fact, if you go to the support section of the website and search for griefing you'll only find this. If one goes to the list of known exploits guess what one finds under the list of Non Exploits, Quote: Common Misconceptions about Exploits This passage contains common tactics and other player conduct that is often mistakenly reported as exploits but are in fact not. [snip] AFK Cloaking A player is present in a system for a long time, usually cloaked, doing nothing at all most of the time. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.23 19:44:46 - [30] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Black Pedro wrote: In Eve you are not entitled to be left alone Unless you are cloaking, apparently Or in a station. Mike Voidstar wrote: Black Pedro wrote: and you certainly not entitled to free, perfect intel that allows you to avoid any fight. Again, unless you are cloaking. Only the sacred cloak is allowed to provide endless safety in Nullsec. All worship the sacred cloak, and let no carebear infringe upon it's holy mandate. Non-sequitur much? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.23 23:57:57 - [31] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: The load put on the server by afk players is negligible. Like almost nothing. Greylord, what you think is griefing, is not griefing. Just like ganking is not griefing. No it wasn't intended, but neither was the use of local as intel. DUM DUM DUM!!! I disgaree its griefing to an extent. the issue isnt having an afk cloaker per say, the issue is not being able to do a single thing about it. A person can be cloaked in a system for weeks and weeks So what that is not griefing, harassment or anything else. You think you are the first one to notice AFK cloaking. It is as old as cloaks themselves. CCP could have patched this out a long, long time ago, but they chose not too. Quote: He isnt the problem as such, but the fact is the metagame, the psychological effect, the what if scenario. In a covert he can be warping about unseen He will hard to pin down via probes, because he can always move and cloak in a new spot in the system being able to have a cyno, that can jump in 50 caps or sub caps instantly is the problem This is laughable for a number of reasons. First this psychological metagame is something CCP actually likes to see develop in the game. CCP did not set out to create a cookie cutter MMO where everyone can log in and ignore other players all the time (Cue Mike's nonsense at this point--but then again Mike has issues with words like 'all'...anything over two letters really). The metagame is a huge part of EVE Online and what makes what is fundamentally a boring game so interesting. Second, even after cynos and jump drives were seriously nerfed quite awhile ago we get the same old whine and dine from the likes of you. "Oh boo-hoo, cynos, cynos, cynos. CCPlease nerf!!!" So they get nerfed (for other reasons) and yet here you are again with "One more nerf and it will be balanced." Quote: You cant expect people to live with that, youre never going to undock anything because of the above points. You cant expect people to have a cap fleet on stand by 24/7 365 days its just stupid to think that and even expect it. Wrong, I have undocked and ratted with an AFK cloaker back when we lived in Cloud Ring when I was in EXE. We had, literally, one good ratting system. We had just gone down into Outer Ring and pooped on his alliance's front yard to try and get some content. This one guy responded by camping out one decent ratting system. Thing is I was in a very different TZ than him. I looked him and his corp up. So I'd go there and rat away quite confident he was unlikely at his keyboard. Why can't you guys undock as a group and do stuff? Why can't you rat in a standing fleet, on voice comms, or even in the same group in the same anomaly? Yes, your ISK/minute or whatever will take a hit, but you are still make ISK, still doing stuff, chatting on comms, and keeping your indexes up. And hey, if they drop on you and you have PvP fit ships you may get some really good content. Why can't you do this? Quote: Also if you have a standby fleet then theres prob spy intel knowing what you have, so it can be easily countered, or your 5 man gang is puny enough anyway for 50 ships to jump through. This the problem regarding afk cloaking. The entire thing is completely and utterley one side because you will never know whats coming. Why do you always assume you are going to lose. Are you just that bad? Do you suck that much at this game? seems like you do as that is what you are basically saying here. "We suck so badly we can't even deal with a handful of guys who might cyno in, but probably won't...so CCP come pat our poo-poo and make us feel better about our incompetent selves." You do realize that is what you just wrote, right? You are basically admitting to being BadGäó. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.24 19:34:02 - [32] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Chance Ravine (reporting on EVE Northeast last weekend) wrote: Someone asked when cloaky camping would get nerfed. Fozzie said that cloaking as a whole would not get nerfed unless local as a whole also got reworked. He said the systems are too intertwined to touch one without the other. I guess we can let this thread die then and revisit it at a future time when there is an opportunity for local to be changed? Awesome! "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.24 20:20:57 - [33] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: I don't think he pvp's. Like at all. I'm guessing he falls into the group that surrendermonkey was hinting at before. Plays by himself as a renter or something like that. Same with scialt and li Soikutsu. I imagine thats why standing up to cloakers is unrealistic. No experience, no allies, no communication with the rest of their block. Just trying to 'get on with the game'. But playing in the most hardcore pvp area of an already hardcore pvp centric game was a poor choice. hang on, dont start with making this about me OK. Firstly there are 100s of people not happy with it. OK? this was just a general suggestion to do something, so stpo making blind childish comments and assumptions. You clearly are one of those sad cloaky campers that will cry like a baby if you sad lives get taken away... please go cry elsewhere because im really not interested, honestly im not. I have no problem with people who do not want to PvP. If that is not what you want to do, fine. Although it is ironic that you get upset when people talk about how you want to play, yet you act like such a little turd when talking about others. However, do not come in and lecture and hector where PvE and PvP intersect. I have gotten on Mike's case because he has never used a cloak to hunt another player. Ever. As such, his comments about it are bereft of practical hands on knowledge. For example, Mike is fond of saying that the cloaker has the advantage of initiative. That is true to some extent. I can decide when to engage...when a target is available. What Mike does not talk about, either due to ignorance or because he knows it will undermine his case, is that the target is not just some helpless player all fat and dumb. The player has local to warn him of my presence and he can warp out. In other words, it can take 20 or 30 tries before finding somebody who is simply not paying attention to local until it is too late. It is a classic case of the seen and the unseen. Everybody sees the poor schlub who screwed up and was caught and killed. What they do not see are the 25 guys before that who either got away, or docked up 30 seconds after a hostile enters system. It is usually at this point that Mike will make an appearance, so let me pre-empt him. GÇ£Working as intended!!! Working as intended!!!1!!1!!one!!GÇ¥ LetGÇÖs set aside the entire possibility that this was not intendedGÇöi.e. the use of local as an intel tool. I think it was not intended, but as I noted before, what CCP intendsGÇªor not is not really an issue unless it is an issue for overall game balance. Let us instead agree that it is working as it should given the underlying mechanics. So in that regards I agree with Mike. If you are paying attention and see the hostile enter system and scurry for safetyGÇªokay, that is as it should currently be. However, there should abso-fecking-lutely be no Goddamn fecking extra protection for the little dim bulb who is completely focused on re-watching season 6 of Game of Thrones while his ishtar cleans out another haven. The anti-cloak people might say, GÇ£IGÇÖm not wanting extra protection for that guy!GÇ¥ But you almost always are. Many of the GÇ£suggestions to deal with AFK cloakersGÇ¥ inevitable NERF CLOAKS IN GENERAL. The cloaking fuel, the cap drain, the POS/citadel decloaking module, the anchorable structure, and on and on and on. None of these things give a mother fecking shite if the fecking cloaked ship is AFK or not. Why should an ATK cloaky hunter be nerfed? He is not AFKing. Why should a player doing exploration in a cloaking ship have his game nerfed? How about a guy using a blockade runner, people donGÇÖt usually AFK in those. And all of these GÇ£suggestionsGÇ¥ (personally, IGÇÖd call most of these GÇ£suggestionsGÇ¥ the mumblings or morons into their drool cups) are never accompanied with any change to the mechanic that allows for AFK camping to be so damn effective. Local. And look, you started yet another thread that has been discussed multiple times. You are in effect mumbling into your drool cup. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6757	Posted - 2017.07.24 23:08:29 - [34] - Quote Greylord Kane wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: Its not griefing a system. They are hunting players. You don't know what griefing really is. Active or not active is irrelevant. Just drop it already. Let me define griefing for you just so you have it, "A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and angers other players within the game, often using aspects of the game in unintended ways..: So you are telling me the CCP intended for people to log on to their computers just after downtime and just leave a character logged in all day without being by their keyboard...really? Really? Please spare me the humor. VERY VERY Relevant by the way..maybe not to you but many others yes. That is not the definition in EVE because that would include much of PvP in this game. So try again. Oh, and using things in game in an unintended manner...that too is not a bug, but a feature in EVE...so you fail for two reasons. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6759	Posted - 2017.07.25 05:17:09 - [35] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: It is usually at this point that Mike will make an appearance, so let me pre-empt him. GÇ£Working as intended!!! Working as intended!!!1!!1!!one!!GÇ¥ LetGÇÖs set aside the entire possibility that this was not intendedGÇöi.e. the use of local as an intel tool. I think it was not intended, but as I noted before, what CCP intendsGÇªor not is not really an issue unless it is an issue for overall game balance. Let us instead agree that it is working as it should given the underlying mechanics. So in that regards I agree with Mike. If you are paying attention and see the hostile enter system and scurry for safetyGÇªokay, that is as it should currently be. However, there should abso-fecking-lutely be no Goddamn fecking extra protection for the little dim bulb who is completely focused on re-watching season 6 of Game of Thrones while his ishtar cleans out another haven. If that was the case, that guy isn't watching local, and you should be able to kill him easily. It's not like local actually does anything to protect you. You have to actively watch local and take action to get to safety. No kidding Mike and nothing I wrote indicated otherwise. In fact, what I wrote indicates precisely the opposite. Quote: I know that's hard for you to understand, as you seem to think everyone is completely safe for as long as they want... kinda like how cloaks work. Can you first inject the reading comprehension skill then train it to 1? Quote: I don't know what all that working as intended drek is about. Both systems work pretty much as designed. The issue being that you are complaining that you don't get enough kills while breaking the defensive efforts of entire alliances with a spare alt potentially flying a newbie ship, and you want extra credit for the "gargantuan" ""effort"" of showing up in a system. Bravo Sierra. You do not know what was intended. Based on comments by Devs over time my suspicion is that local as intel was not intended, but that is what we have. And with cloaks the current situation is balanced if sub-optimal. And no dim wit. I am not complaining I don't have enough to kill I'm complaining that because you are such a stupendous ignoramus you are talking out over you buttehole when it comes to cloaking ships. Hell I don't think you have ever used one other than to hide out and dodge PvP. My point is you are missing the unseen. Ever heard of the broken window fallacy? Long story short is as follows: Precocious young lad throws a rock; breaks cobbler's window. Cobbler has glazier replace broken window for 5 [insert denomination here]. Dim bulb says, "Don't be mad at the young lad he just created economic activity!" Reasonable person notes, "No, because that 5 [insert denomination here] the cobbler spent on the window now will not be spent on meat and vegetables for his dinner...there is no new economic activity. You know...opportunity cost." You are the dim bulb Mike. You can't see the unseen...it does not even register with you. You can't see that to get 1 kill cloaky hunter might have to try many times to get that one kill you point to and whine about on zkill. Alternatively he might have to AFK cloak for a week or two. Nobody is saying, "I should get more kills." I am saying, once again, that in your stupendous ignorance you don't know what the feck you are talking about. You should go try to get one kill in a cloaking ship and see what it is like. But you sit there and not only wallow in your ignorance you are proud of it. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6759	Posted - 2017.07.25 05:18:32 - [36] - Quote Johnny Blueyes wrote: I seem to remember we got rid of off-grid boosting because "no counter play" griping from the PVPers. But talk about dealing with some afk camping issues with no counter play and they crap themselves. If we're going to allow cloaky camping, then we should allow off-grid mining boosts. No risk, no risk. Holy crap you are dumb. I mean really, really dumb. Off grid boosting provides a benefit to active players. Does AFK cloaking provide a benefit to anyone? No. Idiot. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

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.