| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Blue Pixie
   |
Posted - 2007.05.27 09:00:00 -
[1]
I predict people with Covert Ops Cloaking Device II BPOs will love this even more than what inventions did for their profits.
I also predict I'll be flying a Curse much more often than a Pilgrim, at least until the crybabies get NOS nerfed (which I'm almost certain is next on their agenda).
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.27 09:49:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: fire 59
I think the deal with this isn't about cloak specific ships like recons, co ops etc.
Actually, CCP Fendahl's remark was in reference to Stealth Bombers. Granted, they aren't recons or cov ops, but they are 'least in theory "cloak specific" ships.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.27 09:52:00 -
[3]
Originally by: murder one
Personally I wouldn't have any issue at all with scanning/probing regular ships fitted with cloaks. That is to say: all ships except Recons, Covert Ops and Stealth Bombers.
The above three classes simply need to be allowed to fit Covert Ops cloaks (including the SBs), and everyone else not fitting COC2s can be probed/scanned down. Problem solved.
Not saying I disagree with you, but then again... what would be the point of the other cloaking mods?
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 00:21:00 -
[4]
With the ability to use local chat to identify a hostile, AND the means to probe a cloaked pilot, don't you think people will simply turtle up until the threat is removed?
Once it's been established there's a known hostile in your system, wouldn't you...
a) Suspend all vulnerable operations
b) Assemble a "search & destroy" party
c) Eliminate the offending pilot
d) Resume vulnerable operations
I'm really not seeing any particular advantage in flying a cloak-fitted ship, other than *maybe* prolonging the inevitable, c.
Am I missing something?
This pretty much sounds like the end of solo pirating, espionage, and guerilla warfare to me. Or was that the whole idea?
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 00:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Elmicker
No, its the end to someone fitting a 1mil isk cloak to a 100k isk frig and sitting in a system, AFK for days at a time, and "suspending all vulnerable operations" as you put it. Now the defenders will actually be able to discern if the hostile/neutral in local is actually a threat and engage them if possible, instead of the person being absolutely invicible as it is currently.
So basically, them meta-gaming a cloaking module = no fair!
But you meta-gaming a CHAT TAB = totally awesome?
How convenient. 
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 01:36:00 -
[6]
So essentially, you want the opportunity to gather intelligence about your adversary AND the means to engage them at your discretion... WITHOUT having to fit a cloaking device?
If you can't see how ridiculous it is to make a supposedly "covert" ship vulnerable to scan probes ù one that cannot conceal its presence from a freakin' chat tab ù then trying to reason with you is moot.
Originally by: Elmicker
All this change does is provides the defender a means to find what they know is already there, but this process is extremely difficult and time-consuming, which is fairly balanced, as it gives those who are actually at their PCs the advantage, compared to those who are AFK, who will be caught on the first sweep and dealt with.
What advantage? That I can prolong the inevitable? Or that I can lead you on an indefinitely long, wild goose chase?
If "just being in local" is enough to shut down your whole system, something tells me you won't be too happy with an extended game of cat and mouse.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 02:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: ghost st
If i recall correctly when cloaks first come out it was said that they would be probable. We have waited a long time for this fix, that we were supposed to get when cloaks first came out. So in reality we are getting the mechanics that were supopsed to be there in the first place.
If you read the dev blogs, cloaked ships were also supposed to be exempt from local.
Originally by: CCP Hammer
The issue of cloaked pilots showing up on local still needs to be addressed as well.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 03:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: ghosttr
This blog you referenced came out a loong time after cloaks were introduced. I could understand if cloaks came out in rev2, and ccp messed up. But we were supposed to be able to scan them out the day they were released, so you have been playing with a broken system from day 1.
Now that we got out scanner you should have to wait just as long
And if I had cited a blog from three years ago, you'd tell me it was old and no longer relevant. You want to talk about systems that have been broken since day 1? The devs have long said they *never* intended chat to be used as a tactical mechanic. I think CCP Hammer's comments made just a few months ago reinforces that.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 16:51:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Peanut Swsh
and this change will make no difference to your tactics when you are being hunted.
Fixed it for you.
What dumbass is going to stick around to be your prey?
a) you're visible in local the second you enter the system
b) they'll have the means to at least attempt to hunt you down
Sure, pirates who stick to inexperienced, overconfident, and/or incompetent targets in non-sovereign space might not be affected. But guerilla warfare in sovereign space? Forget it.
Best case scenario, you can lead them on an endless wild goose chase as a non-afk cloaker. And if that proves true, I can guarantee you it won't be long before the same nerf herders are screaming bloody murder on the forums for CCP to fix that too.
I'll gladly accept a counter for cloaking, as soon as we get a counter for the chat tab. One without the other is just stupid.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 17:09:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Jayson Lee
...Covert ops and recon should be very dangerous jobs, with a high probability of losing your ship. Currently its the easiest profession out there with little to no risk.
Funny. I'd say the same for hauling/mining.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 18:09:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jayson Lee
In hostile space, deep in enemy territory is suicidal, whats your point?
That it just got a lot safer for you in sovereign space. Nothing short of a well organized blob is going to pose much of a threat. Here's where you tell me that's as it should be.
Originally by: Jayson Lee
Are you agreeing with me that cloaking is alittle bit on the easy side considering how dangerous the job is?
Believe it or not, I've always agreed with you that cloaking was too easy. Where we've clearly disagreed is that using local is far too easy as well.
My main beef is it takes away the initiative from the cloaked pilot. The Force Recon now becomes the hunted, rather than the hunter. The spy must rely on his cloak to avoid capture, not detection.
This is "covert" in name only. True "cloaking" undermined by a freakin' chat tab.
|
Blue Pixie
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 18:49:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Jayson Lee
I just think that maybe you under estimate just what removing local would do.
Absolutely not. I'm not bucking for a quick fix, let's just globally drop local and let the chips fall where they may. But honestly, Jayson, despite our past differences, you've got to admit the whole local/cloaking mechanic are strongly at odds with one another.
|
| |
|