| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
Betrayal Under Mayhem
   |
Posted - 2007.05.28 21:30:00 -
[121]
As a recon ship pilot, I disagree. I think this cloak nerf is MUCH needed. It should not be possible to go AFK in hostile territory with absolute safety. A cloak does this.
Recon ships can hang around AFK in a system. They can sit there for hours, interdicting the system, without even being at the keyboard. They just have to decloak and shoot at something every few hours.
I would be stunned to find that it will be _easy_ to scan down cloakers. And even if it is, well, it's not like you can't spot scanprobes on _your_ system scanner, is it? The chance needs to exist. Cloaked, AFK ships are bad.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 21:33:00 -
[122]
 Originally by: Cadela Fria
[
You might aswell not cloak at all, because all a person have to do, is warp to you, and then go forward really fast and you're done for.
The only way to avoid this is if you're constantly moving, aligned to somewhere, in which case again, you might aswell not be cloaked at all.
people can not understand this simple fact 
____ __ ________
_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 |
Digital Anarchist
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 21:59:00 -
[123]
/signed
But am I the only one thinking carebears too benefit from cloaking? Don't take just one side of it.
----------------
Nerf government! |
Raketefrau
Caldari
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:13:00 -
[124]
/signed
This is ridiculous.
What's the point of a cloak at this point? As soon as someone sees an unknown in local, they'll start dropping probes.
Keep it up CCP, keep giving us more and more reasons to leave.
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:17:00 -
[125]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: Cadela Fria
[
You might aswell not cloak at all, because all a person have to do, is warp to you, and then go forward really fast and you're done for.
The only way to avoid this is if you're constantly moving, aligned to somewhere, in which case again, you might aswell not be cloaked at all.
people can not understand this simple fact
Because it's not a fact. Most likely it's an exaggeration, IMO. But it's definitely an assumption (where it's honest at all) based on very limited information, and zero experience with the new system.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Silverstone
Caldari
Tyrell Corp
INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:20:00 -
[126]
This is just stupied. CCP please stop it. I have played this game from beta and you are making it hardere and harder to play this game. Are you always lisning to the players that scrame loadest?
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected]) |
Psyllus Ktenas
Amarr
BlackHole Entertainment
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:20:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Psyllus Ktenas on 28/05/2007 22:21:40
Edited by: Psyllus Ktenas on 28/05/2007 22:20:13
Originally by: James Lyrus
Recon ships can hang around AFK in a system. They can sit there for hours, interdicting the system, without even being at the keyboard. They just have to decloak and shoot at something every few hours.
Tbh if a couple cloaker can interdict an entire system for you or your corp, then you got a bigger problem then a cloak nerf ever can hope to fix.
|
Cpt Placeholder
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:21:00 -
[128]
/sign
There are enough other things that actually do need nerfing.
|
Phocas Lebournes
Minmatar
New Justice
Molotov Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:29:00 -
[129]
/signed
This nerf actualy follows the worst of all suggestions made to adress this "non issue".
|
EntroX
Caldari
Prophets Of a Damned Universe
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:31:00 -
[130]
/signed
|
Durham Elysion
Solar Wind
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:32:00 -
[131]
Signed. I do not fly recon ships and has not been killed by one either, but I still disagree to the nerf. Recon ships are not that powerful.
|
Pociomundo
Gallente
World Order
The Imperial Order
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:33:00 -
[132]
/signed assuming it applies to covert ops cloaks, if so it's possibly the most stupid and illogical nerf we've had.
|
dcstar
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:43:00 -
[133]
I feel that certain ship types should have the cloaking decive only. none of this these tech1 ships and haulers. nerfing them will only ruin it for those who use it for the correct reasons.
|
flaming phantom
Minmatar
Tyrell Corp
INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:48:00 -
[134]
/signed
why change it at all? its been like this for a long time and now every1 just needs somehting new to whine about. if u can probe out cloaked ships then i dont see why i would wnat a claker at all. they al;ready make my laocking time krap. now when i kill something in pvp and i warp away to hide becasue they bring in a ton of reinforcements, i can warp to a ss in which they can still find me, this means i will still have to move as if i didnt have a cloak, so then y have it at all?
|
Bentula
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:57:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Psyllus Ktenas
Tbh if a couple cloaker can interdict an entire system for you or your corp, then you got a bigger problem then a cloak nerf ever can hope to fix.
If you have several cloakers in system you need to keep a force up there to prevent them from doing stuff or clear that system completly, in which case they just move on. This force defending people cant go afk, while the cloakers can. I can make a alt to haress people with a cloaker while i play with my main, while i cant do this to defend against cloakers(you need to pay attention). There is no way of knowing wether a claoker is atm afk or actively hunting people so you always have to be in alert even if he just sits there afk for a few hours.
Its pretty simple, if your in 0.0 you fought for that space, or the entity you rented it from fought for it. You deserve the ability to remove people that dont have any military power and dont pay attention(being afk and solo) from it. If you think someone cant defend his space bring your buddies and throw them out.
You want guerillia warfare or are scouting for your fleet? This doesnt affect you, nobody will bother trying to scan someone down who is actually at his keyboard and paying attention. They will only try to scan you down if they assume your sitting in a safespot and dont move.
Just an example: Your observing a hostile fleet 200km away, align to a safespot. The second you see someone flying your way warp out and back in from a different angel and distance. Grats your enemies are wasting their probes on you.
Dont forget they have to get within 2000m to decloak, you dont just magically show up on their overview like a cyno field the second someone drops a probe.
The only people this really affects are those noob corp ravens who warp to a safespot and cloak the second someone enters system and who only seem to speak some asian language(and no, im not calling them chinese because i wouldnt know the difference between chinese, korean, japanese or some other language i dont know by looking at it).
|
Komen
Gallente
Industrial Services INC
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 22:58:00 -
[136]
/not signed. And I won't keep quiet. Nyah. It's an abused game mechanic, period.
___________________________________
Wielder of the Trout of Doom(tm)!
___________________________________ |
Raketefrau
Caldari
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:11:00 -
[137]
So, let me get this straight...
You want to do 2 things right now:
1) Remove all static belts and plexes, and make everything require exploration, and
2) Allow anything cloaked to be scanned out
Do you not see the problem here?
|
Rigsta
Gallente
Raddick Explorations
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:13:00 -
[138]
Depends on how it will work. The accuracy should certainly be much lower or impossible if you're scanning for someone using a cov ops cloak II as those ships were designed not to be found.
It is a bit disappointing to hear about this just as stealth bombers might start becoming useful, but currently on sisi they can move pretty quickly so it's not impossible for them to remain cloaked while people are searching for them. It does provide a savvy fleet commander with a way to defend his blob against stealth bombers, but in my mind the entire purpose of introducing these new (and very sexy) bombs was to discourage blobbing.
Originally by: Jim McGregor
I felt the disturbance... it was like a million voices suddenly stopped whining for a second. Unfortunantly it then continued.
|
Cadela Fria
Amarr
The League of Legitimate Nigerian Businessmen
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:14:00 -
[139]
39 have now signed the petition! \o/ *note: I count the unique posts that have /signed in them*
*keeps waving fliars around madly and bugging every person that passes by* support cloak! Let CCP know we like it the way it is!
You sir! yes you! here, take a fliar..then call me in the morning and sign the petition! *runs around some more*
Knowledge is a priviledge, not a right
|
Savesti Kyrsst
Minmatar
White-Noise
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:16:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Bentula
Originally by: Psyllus Ktenas
Tbh if a couple cloaker can interdict an entire system for you or your corp, then you got a bigger problem then a cloak nerf ever can hope to fix.
If you have several cloakers in system you need to keep a force up there to prevent them from doing stuff or clear that system completly, in which case they just move on. This force defending people cant go afk, while the cloakers can. I can make a alt to haress people with a cloaker while i play with my main, while i cant do this to defend against cloakers(you need to pay attention). There is no way of knowing wether a claoker is atm afk or actively hunting people so you always have to be in alert even if he just sits there afk for a few hours.
What's wrong with having to be alert? All you need is for some of your ratters to fit scrams, and to form a gang. If someone is attacked the entire gang needs to come. If people won't leave their carebearing to help someone in trouble then the alliance deserves to lose people and be demoralized.
And... the best ships to hunt probers with will be cloakers ofc  Covops gangs recon, drops a probe, warps gang to result and cancels the warp. waits while the covops sweeps again. Now you have two results and you can bump'n'gank the other cloaker.
|
Alhandra Slayer
Minmatar
Chuskarl's Family
NBSI Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:17:00 -
[141]
39 of 300k players =)
btw i disagree, cloaking actually makes too easy escaping for carebears
|
Dianeces
Minmatar
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:28:00 -
[142]
/signed
Nerf whiners, not cloakers.
|
Cadela Fria
Amarr
The League of Legitimate Nigerian Businessmen
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:29:00 -
[143]
*wishes he had one of those "'scuse me 'scuse me' 'scuse me, do you has a flavour???" cat people to do his fliar petition thing*
Knowledge is a priviledge, not a right
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:31:00 -
[144]
fit a covert ops 2, go afk but flying towards another celestial object even if the scan probes find u by the time they warp to u youre outside the 2.5kim range, meaning u can probably go afk and still remain cloaked.
Cloaked ratting battleships well they might be in trouble but the farmers log anyway everyone else uses interceptors and assualt frigs.
There might be some unsuspecting cov ops pilots that are killed but so be it needs balancing
|
Venatoris Portucalis
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:33:00 -
[145]
Signed.
Nerf the AFKs, not the cloakers.
|
Bentula
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:36:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Savesti Kyrsst
What's wrong with having to be alert? All you need is for some of your ratters to fit scrams, and to form a gang. If someone is attacked the entire gang needs to come. If people won't leave their carebearing to help someone in trouble then the alliance deserves to lose people and be demoralized.
And... the best ships to hunt probers with will be cloakers ofc Covops gangs recon, drops a probe, warps gang to result and cancels the warp. waits while the covops sweeps again. Now you have two results and you can bump'n'gank the other cloaker.
It simply doesnt work, they wont engage you when there are 5 friendlies cruising the belts they will engage you when they have even numbers and you have a triple BS spawn on you.
What i object too is not that you have to be alert living in 0.0, i object to having to be battle ready for hours and be in a pvp setup while trying to earn some bucks while the cloaker is sitting in his living room reading a book and eating pizza or running missions in empire on his carebear alt.
For every hostile recon afk in your space you need to have a active player discouraging attacks. That is not right, and gets abused at the moment. You try having 5-6 cloakers camping as many systems in your constellation and you watch how people get really angry because there is nothing they can do against it if the cloaker is careful and obviously not botherd to do nothing for many hours.
Not to mention that risk vs reward for cloak fitted geddons f.e. is hardly ok at the moment. They do nothing but rat in quiet systems and cloak assoon as anyone enters the system. While carebears in a alliance who fights for their space everyday need to be "alert" because their pvpers cant remove hostiles from a system.
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:38:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Bentula
Originally by: Savesti Kyrsst
What's wrong with having to be alert? All you need is for some of your ratters to fit scrams, and to form a gang. If someone is attacked the entire gang needs to come. If people won't leave their carebearing to help someone in trouble then the alliance deserves to lose people and be demoralized.
And... the best ships to hunt probers with will be cloakers ofc Covops gangs recon, drops a probe, warps gang to result and cancels the warp. waits while the covops sweeps again. Now you have two results and you can bump'n'gank the other cloaker.
It simply doesnt work, they wont engage you when there are 5 friendlies cruising the belts they will engage you when they have even numbers and you have a triple BS spawn on you.
What i object too is not that you have to be alert living in 0.0, i object to having to be battle ready for hours and be in a pvp setup while trying to earn some bucks while the cloaker is sitting in his living room reading a book and eating pizza or running missions in empire on his carebear alt.
For every hostile recon afk in your space you need to have a active player discouraging attacks. That is not right, and gets abused at the moment. You try having 5-6 cloakers camping as many systems in your constellation and you watch how people get really angry because there is nothing they can do against it if the cloaker is careful and obviously not botherd to do nothing for many hours.
Not to mention that risk vs reward for cloak fitted geddons f.e. is hardly ok at the moment. They do nothing but rat in quiet systems and cloak assoon as anyone enters the system. While carebears in a alliance who fights for their space everyday need to be "alert" because their pvpers cant remove hostiles from a system.
the proposed cloak nerf is acceptible , acceptible risk versus reward, will encourgae the afk cloakers to remain active or log under the risk of going kaboom
|
Mic Dirt
|
Posted - 2007.05.28 23:39:00 -
[148]
+1 signed... there is no need for this
|
Igus
|
Posted - 2007.05.29 00:15:00 -
[149]
/signed
|
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
The OSS
|
Posted - 2007.05.29 00:35:00 -
[150]
/signed, totally misplaced nerf. Nerf cloaks on regular ships if you have too but dont touch recons and covops.
-----------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Sharkbait
we are screwed.
My Top 10 List |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |