Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:33:00 -
[1]
I say logistics ships should get a 99% cpu bonus to a new module that allows them to detect cloaked objects without giving any warning to the cloaked objects.
Additionally all members in the logistics ships gang can target the craft through the logistics ship, so like using the logistics ship as a remote sensor.
The new module would give location and radius of the cloaked object and nothing else more specify. Members of the gang will simply know there is a cloaked object at a certain location of certain size.
Because cloaking works by bending light and reflecting/absorbing sound waves, this new module would pinpoint cloaked objects by sensing immediate anomalies of light, that is to say, by detecting relatively close(250km) imperfections in predictable light physics. Just like scientists can find dark matter through imperfections of bending light, so too this module detects cloaked objects.
Because this method would use light absorption rather than sonar, if the cloaked object would have nothing to let it know that it has been detected and its exact location pinpointed.
Allowing for: SURPRISE ur ded. Anyways I think for every measure there needs to be a counter-measure and this would be the perfect way to implement a cloaking counter-measure, and make better use of an extremely unpopular shipclass.
|
Adaris
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:36:00 -
[2]
Logistics ships need love but maybe in some other ways than this. Please Help me, YOU could be next!
|
Winterblink
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:38:00 -
[3]
The counter to this of course is that the cloaked ship just warps away when a logistic ship comes into visual range. So what's the point? Other than hunting down the cloaked ship with a nice tasty target for its uncloaked buddies.
|
Dkorg
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:40:00 -
[4]
Hypocrite much?
You're solution to counter the "SURPRISE ur ded." of cloak is to "SURPRISE ur ded." the cloak?
That's not a soultion. That's whining.
You're idea is fine right up to when you talk about locking. Then you shoot your self in the foot.
|
Princess Jodi
Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:44:00 -
[5]
While I would like to see SOME counter to Cloaking, none of the ideas I've seen are fair or balanced. The closest to fair is having Heat build up that will eventually cause the module to offline, but that only solves the AFK Cloaker problem.
Yes, Logistics Ships need a better role.
|
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:45:00 -
[6]
The point would be to allow cloaked ships to be detected and targeted. I don't think it should be a slam dunk insta DDD cloak-pwning button, just a counter to a ship being 100% undetectable.
|
ry ry
StateCorp
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:46:00 -
[7]
a module that increased your cloaked ship detection range by upto a couple of km or something whilst gimping your ship's max velocity to hell would probably do the trick.
it'd never catch a wary cov ops pilot, but any afkers will get swept up in your detection radius.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:47:00 -
[8]
Originally by: ForumPosterAlt blah blah blah some suggestion even worse than scan probes
at least you admit to being an alt
read this
____ __ ________ _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 - 2007.05.25 15:48:00 -
[9]
Originally by: ry ry a module that increased your cloaked ship detection range by upto a couple of km or something whilst gimping your ship's max velocity to hell would probably do the trick.
it'd never catch a wary cov ops pilot, but any afkers will get swept up in your detection radius.
ry ry you amaze me ____ __ ________ _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 |
Kale Kold
Lensmen
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:50:00 -
[10]
Originally by: ForumPosterAlt There needs to be a counter to cloak.
They did that in Dark Age of Camelot and completely killed the stealth class. Whats the point of stealth/cloak if people can detect you? I personally think that the cloaked ships are nicely balanced, i mean it's not as if they are pwnmobiles is it? because of the drawbacks of using a cloak its fine as it is.
It seems to me the only people who whine about cloaks needing a nerf and need to be detectable are the people who want to have an easy gank. Especially those that whine about afk cloaking, purleese.
If cloaks are teh uber wtfpwn button, why isn't everybody using them?
|
|
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:51:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Dkorg Hypocrite much?
You're solution to counter the "SURPRISE ur ded." of cloak is to "SURPRISE ur ded." the cloak?
That's not a soultion. That's whining.
You're idea is fine right up to when you talk about locking. Then you shoot your self in the foot.
Thats any ship when you're primaried by overwhelming ordnance. It just makes sense, thats actually how you would go about detecting klingon stealth, passively through light analysis.
Also I don't think it'd be so unfair that a counter to a module that makes a ship undetectable, be an undetectable counter. If someone where to complain about that it'd be pot meet kettle.
|
Tortun Nahme
Minmatar Heimatar Services Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:54:00 -
[12]
there already IS a counter to cloak, its called local, you can see a person is in system but cant locate them, now you are aware and can be on your guard, nuff said
|
Vitrael
Stormriders Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:55:00 -
[13]
Why does there need to be a counter to cloak? Cloaked ships can't attack, can barely move, have a targeting countdown. What more do you want? Or is this just another whine about cloak AFKs in local?
----------
|
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:56:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Kale Kold
Originally by: ForumPosterAlt There needs to be a counter to cloak.
They did that in Dark Age of Camelot and completely killed the stealth class. Whats the point of stealth/cloak if people can detect you? I personally think that the cloaked ships are nicely balanced, i mean it's not as if they are pwnmobiles is it? because of the drawbacks of using a cloak its fine as it is.
It seems to me the only people who whine about cloaks needing a nerf and need to be detectable are the people who want to have an easy gank. Especially those that whine about afk cloaking, purleese.
If cloaks are teh uber wtfpwn button, why isn't everybody using them?
You fail to see the bigger picture, there simply isn't a counter. Also cloak has a multitude of uses such as afk, surprise ganking, and (by far the most valuable) intelligence collecting, following enemy ships, and just being in the presense of enemies without them able to detect you is invaluable.
In the end it'd make logistics ships more desirable and cloaking more risky. As of right now cloaking is even better than having an invincible tank, nobody can even see you.
|
Faol'gus
T Miners
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:57:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Faol''gus on 25/05/2007 16:03:14 Meh all they need is a probe that can detect cloaks. But in addition allow a cloaked ship to know when a scan for it has taken place allowing it to warp to another safe spot. That way a cloaked ship that is paying attention can't be found. Where as an afk cloaker or just being plain lazy will get you shot. Which of course any miner etc that is afk or not watching local deserves to get popped.
|
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:59:00 -
[16]
Well i'm going to lunch. I thought it was a good and fair idea but it looks like I hit a nerve and this thread is diverging to whine accusations and counter-whines. /sigh
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:05:00 -
[17]
Soon as we get a counter for local, you can have your counter for cloaks.
|
Dkorg
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:10:00 -
[18]
Originally by: ForumPosterAlt The point would be to allow cloaked ships to be detected and targeted. I don't think it should be a slam dunk insta DDD cloak-pwning button, just a counter to a ship being 100% undetectable.
WTF are you talking about? You said you wanted to be able to lock them while cloaked, without their knowledge, and then "SURPRISE ur ded." them. You are asking exactly for a "slam dunk insta DD cloak-pwning button."
Your idea of detecting if one is in the area I like and on casual inspection looks good. Which is a shame since based on your hypocrite statements I have to add you to the ignore list.
/me needs to learn to stop feeding the trolls.
|
Plutoinum
German Cyberdome Corp
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:20:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 25/05/2007 16:19:41 If I had an idea, how to combat afk cloakers without having an impact on normal covert ops and recon operations, I'd be all for changing it.
And about cloakers using fuel: I wouldn't mind, if non-covert ops cloaking devices would do that or ships with non-covert ops cloaking devices would be probable to some extent with special equipment. Would make life more difficult for those cloaking farmers and that would be nice.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:20:00 -
[20]
Originally by: ForumPosterAlt
In the end it'd make logistics ships more desirable and cloaking more risky. As of right now cloaking is even better than having an invincible tank, nobody can even see you.
i laughed when i read that ____ __ ________ _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 |
|
|
ReverendM
Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:20:00 -
[21]
Cleaned up a bit Please try to stay civil. If you don't like an idea, come up with a good reason why it shouldn't be implemented.
Oh, and I'm told the correct way to detect Klingon stealth is by riging a torpedo's to track it's exaust and then fire on the explosion.
-ReverendM
|
|
Davich MacGregor
Minmatar Freedom-Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:24:00 -
[22]
Want a nerf to cloak? World of Warcraft.
|
Winterblink
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 16:32:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Winterblink on 25/05/2007 16:30:59
Originally by: ReverendM Cleaned up a bit Please try to stay civil. If you don't like an idea, come up with a good reason why it shouldn't be implemented.
Oh, and I'm told the correct way to detect Klingon stealth is by riging a torpedo's to track it's exaust and then fire on the explosion.
-ReverendM
To accomodate that, CCP would need to implement crews so we can bring a comms officer and doctor to come up with those wonderful idea. Oh and a science officer... to assist, of course. You know, because it's not like the lackey at tactical could come up with anything like that. :)
Alternately, could do the whole tachyon beam detection grid thingy. Hey.. . Amarr have a use now! :p
|
Yakoff
Star Scream Inc. Ultima Rati0
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 17:05:00 -
[24]
Just an idea. Perhaps tie cloak into the shields. Perhaps the cloak uses the shield harmonics to hide said ship. So the amount of time a ship can stay cloaked is proportional to the amount of shields left.
Shields would be drained as the cloak is run. Once shields are gone, the cloak goes offline - requiring player to recharge their shields before cloak can become active again.
Amount of shield energy drained by the cloak depends on the signature/shield radius that the ship gives off. A titan would require more shield energy transfer towards the cloak as it is bigger.
Granted, you could put the shield recharge mods on to help negate this effect - but said ship starts loosing modules for other things.
I like this idea - as it does not penalize the cloakers - but it does penalize the afk cloakers.
|
War Fairy
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 17:55:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Yakoff Shields would be drained as the cloak is run. Once shields are gone, the cloak goes offline - requiring player to recharge their shields before cloak can become active again.
This is unbalanced. This is a significant penalty to shield tankers and a minor concern for armor tankers.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 17:58:00 -
[26]
Originally by: War Fairy
Originally by: Yakoff Shields would be drained as the cloak is run. Once shields are gone, the cloak goes offline - requiring player to recharge their shields before cloak can become active again.
This is unbalanced. This is a significant penalty to shield tankers and a minor concern for armor tankers.
how is it a minor concern? an armor tanker does not fit shield boosters ____ __ ________ _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 |
War Fairy
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 18:04:00 -
[27]
Originally by: SiJira how is it a minor concern? an armor tanker does not fit shield boosters
You uncloak and have no/reduced tank compared to uncloaking and still having a tank. One is useless and the other is still combat ready.
If you're going to use something to power a module have it be cap. That's what it's there for.
|
ForumPosterAlt
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 18:12:00 -
[28]
Back from lunch. I think that tying cloak detection into scan probes isn't a terrible idea but that just tells you there general location, it won't help you target them.
Tying shields to cloak or having the burden of staying cloaked on the cloaker is quite lazy, and would be a much bigger nerf than having 1 single ship class to watch out for. If you fit a cloak you can set up your overview with a 'logistics only' group.
And i'm quite surprised from the strong resentment of having any counter whatsoever to a cloak. There are counters to nearly everything else in eve, I don't see how cloak should be any different.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 18:21:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Laboratus Edited by: Laboratus on 25/05/2007 18:15:08 Interceptors with drones,
Dont find targets in safespots. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Laboratus
Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 18:26:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Laboratus Edited by: Laboratus on 25/05/2007 18:15:08 Interceptors with drones,
Dont find targets in safespots.
See, this is exactly what I was talking about in my post earlier. If the primary control failed and it slipped through it should be able to hide. The fact that sensors are ftl and effective enough to pinpoint any ship in 14AU is a bit nutty already, don't you agree... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |