EVE Search - Make cloaks use Heavy Water

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Make cloaks use Heavy Water

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Ozzie Asrail Exploited	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:07:00 - [31] Fantasic idea to the problem, I think that would work really well. Some thoughts on ballance? Covops\Bombers - No Heavy Water Usage. Force Recons - cloak-style bonus. 96%-100% reduction so would use 0 heavy water at level 5. Want to prema-camp a system? spend the 25+ days training imho. Battleships - 200% usage Capships - 400% usage -----
Miharu Hinata Gallente Noodle Ninja	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:17:00 - [32] This is a good idea, but i think that Cov ops and Recons should not have to consume fuel to stay cloaked, since as far as i know being cloaked is one of the main points in having a cov ops or recon ship. Or as some other people have said, only allow cov ops and recon ships to use cloaks, or something along those lines.
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:18:00 - [33] Edited by: Alski on 24/05/2007 12:24:17 Originally by: TRUEAMARRIANMIGHT Edited by: TRUEAMARRIANMIGHT on 24/05/2007 11:57:48 WHAT THE HELL AM I DOING!? No way I'd want the cloaks nerfed. Is that because Amarr need to run and hide a lot? edit: Originally by: Ozzie Asrail Fantasic idea to the problem, I think that would work really well. Some thoughts on ballance? Covops\Bombers - No Heavy Water Usage. Force Recons - cloak-style bonus. 96%-100% reduction so would use 0 heavy water at level 5. Want to prema-camp a system? spend the 25+ days training imho. Battleships - 200% usage Capships - 400% usage That is a great way of doing it, as an extra evil bonus, i think that if fitted on a capship the cloak burns the same type of isotope as the capship's jump drive uses, if you screw up masiveley and have to hide cloaked for too long then you forgo your ability to jump out without a rescue party to get you fuel. Mmmm... i'm feeling evil this morning. -
TRUEAMARRIANMIGHT	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:20:00 - [34] Originally by: Alski Originally by: TRUEAMARRIANMIGHT Edited by: TRUEAMARRIANMIGHT on 24/05/2007 11:57:48 WHAT THE HELL AM I DOING!? No way I'd want the cloaks nerfed. Is that because Amarr need to run and hide a lot? We need the OOMPH, and quickly too please.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:43:00 - [35] I think I suggested this for the first time like 9 months ago, and still signed signature removed - please contact us to find out why (include the URL of your sig) - Jacques([email protected])
KISOGOKU	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:48:00 - [36] Edited by: KISOGOKU on 24/05/2007 12:48:36 First : NO Second already pointed but people ignoring stealth bombers and combat reckons they have to use improved cloak and im sure nobody can say they are not ships intended to use cloak 3th-what will happen if i go to enemy line with cheap frig or other ship( how cynos are setup now)to open cyno say for sometime later?how will i carry Liquid Ozone and water? It will create more headache than it solved Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 24/05/2007 11:10:56 Saw this in another thread where LUKEC pointed this out as an idea. What do people think Edit: This wouldn't apply to covert ops cloaks, I would think. Edit:spelling
Saladin Minmatar Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:52:00 - [37] I would agree with this in principle, but it does not go far enough. I think the changes should also stop capital ships from using cloaks. Say all non-cap ships get a -99.9% bonus to fitting reqs for non-covert cloaks, and cap ships don't get it. ----
Ares Lightfeather Gallente	Posted - 2007.05.24 12:53:00 - [38] Edited by: Ares Lightfeather on 24/05/2007 12:52:35 Originally by: Ozzie Asrail Fantasic idea to the problem, I think that would work really well. Some thoughts on ballance? Covops\Bombers - No Heavy Water Usage. Force Recons - cloak-style bonus. 96%-100% reduction so would use 0 heavy water at level 5. Want to prema-camp a system? spend the 25+ days training imho. Battleships - 200% usage Capships - 400% usage As far as number are concerned, the quantity of <insert fuel name here> needed should be dependent of ship mass / ship volume. Which would also prevent large ships from using cloaks for too long.
Kaar Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.05.24 13:26:00 - [39] No. Fix the farmer ss-cloak-ravens by increasing the % of scrambling frigs and make npc agro extend your log timer by a few minutes. I think the new POS scanner arrays should be able to probe down cloakers though, and if that area effect decloaking mod ever gets in thats your solution. --- ---
Lysit Kaune Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2007.05.24 13:32:00 - [40] Wouldn't it be easier to allow probing of cloaked ships? Make i so it drops you close by, then a stealth bomber could seek it out using a specialised large AOE low yield bomb to force an uncloak (Stealth bomber bombs coming soon (TM)). It might not let you catch cloaked ships that have someone watching over it but you'd remove a big AFK problem.
Valator Uel Caldari Pax Minor Asylum Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:10:00 - [41] What about correlation with the size of the ship to the amount of heavy water consumed? Lets say a frig with a 40m sig radius will consume 40 Heavy water per day (or 2 per hour). A carrier with 1000m sig radius consumes 1000 heavy water per day (or 42 heavy water per hour). So, if you put a cloak on a bigger ship you need more fuel. IMO it makes sense since the more ship you have to cloak the more "energy" and fuel it takes. -----------------------------------------------------
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:13:00 - [42] Your cloak is driven off your ship's reactor core, the same core that drives your engines, Warp drives, shields, etc. That is why you can't activate any modules when cloaked; you don't have the power to do it. You can have "fuel" for your cloaks when you have fuel for your ships. Otherwise its just a huge nerf that would prohibit actually using them in a campaign. their intention is to keep the ship SAFE and unseen, how can you do that when you can't carry enough fuel to do an extended trek into enemy/unknown territory? I would support a slow cap drain while cloaked, but fuel? No way. <-----------> Factional Warfare: The LowSec wars which never happened.
Banana Torres The Green Banana Corporation Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:15:00 - [43] A quick play with quickfit shows that the following would fit: Iteron Mark V Prototype Cloaking Device I Turret Slot Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Rigs : Cargohold Optimization I \ Cargohold Optimization I \ Cargohold Optimization I \ That gives a cargo hold of 38424 m3 or 96060 bits of heavy water Which would be more than enough to last a few years without having to go and get more heavy water.
Valrandir Gallente Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:17:00 - [44] Originally by: Tzrailasa I think there are some reasonable arguments for this, but there should be differences between the different types of cloaks/ships.... Cloaking should still be a very useful tool.... Quick ideas.... Cov-ops cloaks should be able to run for maybe 12-24 hours (maybe even more) on one cargo-load of fuel for a cov-ops, and maybe 8 hours for a recon. T2 cloak, maybe run 1-2 hours on one cargo-load of fuel. T1 cloak, maybe 30 minutes on one cargo-load of fuel. Figures and methods open for discussion and modification... Yes, as specified above. -------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware
Ank Myrandor Amarr Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:18:00 - [45] what griefers ? cloacking ships arent that good and if your not a stealth bomber or a recon, your ****e with a cloack, think it as a new sort of stab :P but then for smarter people ontopic heavy water ?! that comes to the bright idea LETS CLOACK POS TOWERS :P hahahah that would be a nice carebear boost
LUH 3471	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:19:00 - [46] Edited by: LUH 3471 on 24/05/2007 14:21:57 i dont like this solution, despite the fact that i hate afk cloakers. what i would like to see and what would be a much better solution is a scanning array u can anchor at a pos, which requires sometimes 30mins another time 1hour to scan for cloaked ships. also an advanced scanning array for an outpost would be sweet. i mean how much would it suck if youre 50jumps into 0.0 from nearest station and then u run out of fuel rendering your ship completly useless.
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:26:00 - [47] Originally by: Reiisha Good idea, really. A simple solution technically would be to tie in the activation time with a fuel requirement, in other words, ammo. Covert Ops Cloaks are exempt from this, but prototype and improved cloaks would need "ammo" to fuel their cloaking. Signed like a bajillion times. Would help stop all these cloaking farmers infesting space BoB vs the coalition of family values
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:29:00 - [48] Originally by: Banana Torres A quick play with quickfit shows that the following would fit: Iteron Mark V Prototype Cloaking Device I Turret Slot Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Cap Recharger I Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Rigs : Cargohold Optimization I \ Cargohold Optimization I \ Cargohold Optimization I \ That gives a cargo hold of 38424 m3 or 96060 bits of heavy water Which would be more than enough to last a few years without having to go and get more heavy water. Which gets you a very slow, untanked, defenceless isk sink (seriousley though, i know you mean as a kind of 'in-air refueling' for cloaks) And yeah thats a good point, if for example 100m3 worth of units was enouth for 10 minutes, then 96000 would be good for 6.6 days, and allthough it would be supplying at least one other cloaked ship, most of the time both ships will be logged off. However - the fact that they are logged off fix's the one of the problems this is designed to solve - combat ships that are flown to a hostile system, useuley an outpost system and then safespoted and clocked, preventing mining + ratting in that system because at any time the hostile ship(s) can become non-AFK and gank, then with impunity return to being AFK and disrupting ops without even being at the keyboard, or even in the house. -
QuantumX Minmatar Sicarri Covenant	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:30:00 - [49] LOL @ people who want cloaks nerf'd cos people in their space.. Covert OP's should never and i repeat EVER use fuel and should last forever.. Thats their purpose. Scanning them out, means you might as well remove them from game. As for larger ships, a cloak already nerf's their ability to fight, if any fuels was implemented it would have to have a small m3, and a small amount should last for hours at the very least. Without the need to fill your cargo with fuels and not ammo. Cloaking works for and against Carbears, it works for and against pvp'ers thats balance.
Judas Lonestar Ganja Labs Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:31:00 - [50] So just for my own info... Why doesnt every list how many times they've been jumped and popped by cloaked ships. I just want to see how many people have a valid complaint and how many are just whining for the sake of banging on the keyboard.
Judas Lonestar Ganja Labs Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:32:00 - [51] Originally by: QuantumX LOL @ people who want cloaks nerf'd cos people in their space.. Covert OP's should never and i repeat EVER use fuel and should last forever.. Thats their purpose. Scanning them out, means you might as well remove them from game. As for larger ships, a cloak already nerf's their ability to fight, if any fuels was implemented it would have to have a small m3, and a small amount should last for hours at the very least. Without the need to fill your cargo with fuels and not ammo. Cloaking works for and against Carbears, it works for and against pvp'ers thats balance. Your use of logic goes against the rules of forum whining. Please refrain from using logic and facts. This is an emotional argument where facts have no place!
djenghis jan Amarr Debiloff's Vanguard	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:48:00 - [52] How about making the consumption a function of scan probes you try to hide from. If you opponent tries to scan you and drops a probe, the cloaking device adapts but needs an increased amount of fuel to do that. So if the probeship wants his prey he needs to keep probing until his target runs out of fuel. This could also work if used with the normal capacitor as fuel source. You could then decloak warp cloak to stay hidden and reload you capacitor but not stay afk for ever. Balancing between probe use and cloak cap use/fuel consumption needs to be done carefully of course
Banana Torres The Green Banana Corporation Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.24 14:56:00 - [53] Originally by: Alski Which gets you a very slow, untanked, defenceless isk sink (seriousley though, i know you mean as a kind of 'in-air refueling' for cloaks) I think you missed the cloak in the high slot. Get this baby into the target system, turn on the cloak. Got to Asda and buy some out of date food. Come back and she will still be cloaked and you can read all the offensive comments in local.
Yarek Balear Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:14:00 - [54] As some have suggested here - Do NOT affect Covert Ops Cloaking ships (i.e. Stealth Bombers, Force Recons, Covert OPS ships). Affecting the Improved Cloaks or Prototype Cloaking device to use fuel sounds based on the sig radius of the ship its fitted to sounds like a reasonable half-way solution to the AFK or Macro BS cloaking problem while not affecting those that have specialised in the art of sneaky sneaky. Force recons already have limited offensive/defensive capability anyway, so they are not exactly the kind of ship to lock down a system on their own.
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:19:00 - [55] Bad idea. Would kill exploration completetly. Simply the probes take up a cov ops whole cargo space. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Yarek Balear Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:27:00 - [56] Originally by: Laboratus Bad idea. Would kill exploration completetly. Simply the probes take up a cov ops whole cargo space. Did you read the thread at all ???
SiJira	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:31:00 - [57] Originally by: Dark Shikari This wouldn't apply to covert ops cloaks, I would think. sounds good ____ __ ________ _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 - 2007.05.24 15:35:00 - [58] Originally by: Yarek Balear Originally by: Laboratus Bad idea. Would kill exploration completetly. Simply the probes take up a cov ops whole cargo space. Did you read the thread at all ??? Yes, and I still agree with him. If you are spending an extended time exploring or anything else you don't HAVE the cargo capacity for fuel for a cloak. My "standard" loadout of probes for all situations and extended flights is over 350m3. Try putting that and fuel in most ships <-----------> Factional Warfare: The LowSec wars which never happened.
Mad Rage Amarr Dark Crystal Corporation	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:35:00 - [59] why make cloak hard to used if your living in 0.0 and your a cloak ship no other ship in the sector major problem in 0.0 its hard to get resources like that and they will be near impossible to get nerfing the cloak will make thing hard to play and no more people will use cloak remember some people like covert op need to carry ammo frigate size also minmatar, gallente and caldari need ammo as well so adding fual and ammo in a cargo bay (note there cargo size) you won;t be able to use the cloak well more like making it completely useless i htink the point of cloak is to hunt without been seen plus do you know how long it take to train for a recon there mroe powerful then covert op since they pop almost one shot lol
Ling Xiao Prism Project Technologies	Posted - 2007.05.24 15:39:00 - [60] Originally by: Mad Rage why make cloak hard to used if your living in 0.0 and your a cloak ship no other ship in the sector major problem in 0.0 its hard to get resources like that and they will be near impossible to get nerfing the cloak will make thing hard to play and no more people will use cloak remember some people like covert op need to carry ammo frigate size also minmatar, gallente and caldari need ammo as well so adding fual and ammo in a cargo bay (note there cargo size) you won;t be able to use the cloak well more like making it completely useless i htink the point of cloak is to hunt without been seen plus do you know how long it take to train for a recon there mroe powerful then covert op since they pop almost one shot lol Post of the century. A++ would read again. __________ If you think the game is rigged, why are you still playing?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.