Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Elderel
The Black Legionnares BLACK-MARK
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
Was discussing some of the proposed ideas for addressing cloaky grieving with the corp a few nights back and stumbled across what may just be a viable solution that makes both sides happy with the implementation.
The now defunct System Scanning Array POS module could be redesigned as a sovereignty upgrade. The way we envisioned it working went through a few revisions as we discussed the issues with each model.
1) Hourly pulse that disrupted all cloaking devices in a system for 5-10 minutes. 2) Multiple hour pulse that disrupted all cloaking in a system for 30 minutes. 3) Activated module that disrupts all cloaking in a system for 5-10 minutes with a 30 or 60 minute recycle time.
We ended up liking version 3 for a lot of reasons - people actually at the controls aren't who we hate to see in local for 12+ hours at a time, people that log in, cloak and go to work/school/incursion on their main are the ones we're all tired of seeing in local. Online games should favor active play over passive and cloaks do exactly the opposite with no real solution in sight. Yes, I know probes and such to disrupt cloaks have been suggested, quite literally, hundreds (maybe thousands even) of times and are always suggestions without drawbacks to the people wanting to find a cloaked pilot - I don't care about the loss of friendly and personal cloaking if it requires *everyone* to actually be at their computers and playing the game to impact the ability of others to play the game they way they want. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
5550
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Why is this needed and what does it solve?
Cloaking and going AFK, requires the same amount of effort, that gathering intel from the local channel requires. The difference is that the psychological effects from AFKing are not guaranteed, whereas the intel from local is.
If you want a change/nerf to cloaking, then you should also add in changes to local. That is if you are actually after a balanced approach.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Elderel
The Black Legionnares BLACK-MARK
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Why does any suggestion for a change to cloaking get answered with calls for a change to local? Do you people really not understand just how retardedly unbalanced cloaking currently is in favor of the cloaked? |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
5550
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Elderel wrote:Why does any suggestion for a change to cloaking get answered with calls for a change to local? Do you people really not understand just how retardedly unbalanced cloaking currently is in favor of the cloaked? OK answer me this:
What mechanic are they using to interact with you, to create the psychological effects?
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Not again?
Please consult this thread concerning afk cloaking issues.
Despite that, it already looks like CCP are looking into a proposed cloaky hunter ship as per the recent CSM minutes.
"All griefers are lazy cowards with the current climate of broken player policing systems." |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
105
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
did only read first few sentences.
there is no griefing, space isnt yours so everybody may sit whereever he likes. you should have known that before going to zero. |
Syndic Thrass
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
How many times have you died to a cloaked ship that had no one at the keyboard?
I've never heard of someone getting killed by an AFK cloakie.
Reguards, Iskies-mommies-toonies-corpies-goonies 0707 m8m8m8 |
Elderel
The Black Legionnares BLACK-MARK
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
That's the problem with cloaking as it's existed since it's introduction to EvE - actual interaction isn't necessary to disrupt operations in a system. Any cloaked ship is a possible cyno-beacon away from being anything from a small cov-ops gang to a full blown titan bridged fleet drop and anyone that's been in nullsec more than a week has been expensively reminded of this reality on at least the corp level. The fact that there's no way to find a cloaked ship once it's established in system is an amazingly broken mechanic that should really have been addressed before cloaks were ever introduced to the game.
Yes Grumpy, I'm aware of both that thread and the latest CSM minutes which is what we were discussing to generate this idea. It's less design intensive (and far more balanced) than a new ship, there's no training required, tying it into the sov system doesn't make cloaks useless and requires alliances make at least a nominal sacrifice to deter afk cloaky griefers, and the effects impact everyone equally which is something I guarantee the current CCP plan doesn't do. As for people that choose to live in npc nullsec not getting to use this solution, there are costs to every decision. |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
980
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
Syndic Thrass wrote:How many times have you died to a cloaked ship that had no one at the keyboard?
I've never heard of someone getting killed by an AFK cloakie.
Not empty quoting.
Answer the question: when was the last time someone died to a person that was AFK? |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
437
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Feligast wrote:Syndic Thrass wrote:How many times have you died to a cloaked ship that had no one at the keyboard?
I've never heard of someone getting killed by an AFK cloakie. Not empty quoting. Answer the question: when was the last time someone died to a person that was AFK?
I did see a bot malfunction and shoot blues once... |
|
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
980
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Feligast wrote:Syndic Thrass wrote:How many times have you died to a cloaked ship that had no one at the keyboard?
I've never heard of someone getting killed by an AFK cloakie. Not empty quoting. Answer the question: when was the last time someone died to a person that was AFK? I did see a bot malfunction and shoot blues once...
It wasn't cloaked, thus, not AFK cloaking. |
Syndic Thrass
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:58:00 -
[12] - Quote
Elderel wrote:That's the problem with cloaking as it's existed since it's introduction to EvE - actual interaction isn't necessary to disrupt operations in a system. Any cloaked ship is a possible cyno-beacon away from being anything from a small cov-ops gang to a full blown titan bridged fleet drop and anyone that's been in nullsec more than a week has been expensively reminded of this reality on at least the corp level. The fact that there's no way to find a cloaked ship once it's established in system is an amazingly broken mechanic that should really have been addressed before cloaks were ever introduced to the game.
Yes Grumpy, I'm aware of both that thread and the latest CSM minutes which is what we were discussing to generate this idea. It's less design intensive (and far more balanced) than a new ship, there's no training required, tying it into the sov system doesn't make cloaks useless and requires alliances make at least a nominal sacrifice to deter afk cloaky griefers, and the effects impact everyone equally which is something I guarantee the current CCP plan doesn't do. As for people that choose to live in npc nullsec not getting to use this solution, there are costs to every decision. Wait wait wait wait. Slow down just one second there partner. Are you trying to tell me EVE is a sandbox where my actions can affect you? This is not what I signed up for.
Reguards, Iskies-mommies-toonies-corpies-goonies 0707 m8m8m8 |
Syndic Thrass
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
hope this helps
Reguards, Iskies-mommies-toonies-corpies-goonies 0707 m8m8m8 |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
87
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Elderel wrote: Yes Grumpy, I'm aware of both that thread and the latest CSM minutes which is what we were discussing to generate this idea. It's less design intensive (and far more balanced) than a new ship, there's no training required, tying it into the sov system doesn't make cloaks useless and requires alliances make at least a nominal sacrifice to deter afk cloaky griefers, and the effects impact everyone equally which is something I guarantee the current CCP plan doesn't do. As for people that choose to live in npc nullsec not getting to use this solution, there are costs to every decision.
So its ok for people who have trained into cloaky specific ships where its there main defence by design to waste their SP it seems? But not sensible for a counter ship?
Please provide the place where you got the crystal ball for the CCP plans for the cloaky hunter, I'd like to buy one. Or has the CSM been leaking more NDA materials?
As an example of how narrow minded you are: acording to your interactive pulse system anybody wanting to transport goods in a blockade runner through SOV in your systems could have a nasty suprise waiting for him as a result of gate watching their approach or their gate flash. Way to remove the usefulness of one ship in a simple "foul" swoop.
Then there is the effective removal of any reasonable covert intel role.
"All griefers are lazy cowards with the current climate of broken player policing systems." |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
106
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Elderel wrote:That's the problem with cloaking as it's existed since it's introduction to EvE - actual interaction isn't necessary to disrupt operations in a system. Any cloaked ship is a possible cyno-beacon away from being anything from a small cov-ops gang to a full blown titan bridged fleet drop and anyone that's been in nullsec more than a week has been expensively reminded of this reality on at least the corp level. The fact that there's no way to find a cloaked ship once it's established in system is an amazingly broken mechanic that should really have been addressed before cloaks were ever introduced to the game.
Yes Grumpy, I'm aware of both that thread and the latest CSM minutes which is what we were discussing to generate this idea. It's less design intensive (and far more balanced) than a new ship, there's no training required, tying it into the sov system doesn't make cloaks useless and requires alliances make at least a nominal sacrifice to deter afk cloaky griefers, and the effects impact everyone equally which is something I guarantee the current CCP plan doesn't do. As for people that choose to live in npc nullsec not getting to use this solution, there are costs to every decision.
what the problem exactly? What you trying to describe is the usual eve gameplay, ships shoot other ships, ships drop other ships, cynoalts everywhere. Its normality, there is nothing broken.
For people like you who want an "own" piece of space without the fear of afk cloakers and hotdrops, CCP created wormhole space. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
5552
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:34:00 -
[16] - Quote
You haven't answered my question yet Elderel.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Bent Barrel
12
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
Elderel wrote:Was discussing some of the proposed ideas for addressing cloaky grieving with the corp a few nights back and stumbled across what may just be a viable solution that makes both sides happy with the implementation.
The now defunct System Scanning Array POS module could be redesigned as a sovereignty upgrade. The way we envisioned it working went through a few revisions as we discussed the issues with each model.
1) Hourly pulse that disrupted all cloaking devices in a system for 5-10 minutes. 2) Multiple hour pulse that disrupted all cloaking in a system for 30 minutes. 3) Activated module that disrupts all cloaking in a system for 5-10 minutes with a 30 or 60 minute recycle time.
We ended up liking version 3 for a lot of reasons - people actually at the controls aren't who we hate to see in local for 12+ hours at a time, people that log in, cloak and go to work/school/incursion on their main are the ones we're all tired of seeing in local. Online games should favor active play over passive and cloaks do exactly the opposite with no real solution in sight. Yes, I know probes and such to disrupt cloaks have been suggested, quite literally, hundreds (maybe thousands even) of times and are always suggestions without drawbacks to the people wanting to find a cloaked pilot - I don't care about the loss of friendly and personal cloaking if it requires *everyone* to actually be at their computers and playing the game to impact the ability of others to play the game they way they want.
1st step: propose a solution to identify AFK CLOAKY GRIEFERS 2nd step: propose a solution to find and kill only those
Without 1st step you have not achieved your goal. You simply nerfed all cloaks.
Your solution affects both while yoru stated goal is different. |
Blatant Forum Alt
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
How can afk cloaks harm you in any way? FFS grow a pair. |
Mr Floydy
The Xenodus Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 13:54:00 -
[19] - Quote
Dear OP. Man up. Go play a single player game if you don't like sharing space with other people. |
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
49
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 14:37:00 -
[20] - Quote
Same old drivel.....
OP claims that his solution is to stop AFK cloaking, when its really to dissrupt ALL cloaking from his safe little area of low/null security space.
Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. |
|
XXSketchxx
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
121
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 14:40:00 -
[21] - Quote
Feligast wrote:Syndic Thrass wrote:How many times have you died to a cloaked ship that had no one at the keyboard?
I've never heard of someone getting killed by an AFK cloakie. Not empty quoting. Answer the question: when was the last time someone died to a person that was AFK?
Probably a test carrier within the last week. |
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous
155
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 14:42:00 -
[22] - Quote
Ah the wonderful afk cloaker: can't target, can't shoot and no one is at the keyboard. Yet somehow it keeps entire systems on lock down. If one guy in your system is preventing you from doing pve in your system then it isn't really your system now is it? It's his system. Whether he's cloaked and afk or uncloaked and very obviously active is irrelevant. |
Mary Annabelle
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 15:26:00 -
[23] - Quote
Bent Barrel wrote:1st step: propose a solution to identify AFK CLOAKY GRIEFERS 2nd step: propose a solution to find and kill only those
Without 1st step you have not achieved your goal. You simply nerfed all cloaks.
Your solution affects both while yoru stated goal is different.
Wait, I have it!
Seeing the name in local, and deducing they were cloaked, you then assumed due to no contact with them they must be AFK.
This depressed you greatly, causing you to self destruct your new battleship / exhumer / titan.
This means, the AFK cloaker griefed you, resulted in ship loss, and must be stopped.
Got it.... |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
250
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 16:03:00 -
[24] - Quote
The only person who is under threat from any kind of ship that can fit a covops cloak is a solo ratting idiot in a badly fit ship who has no corp or alliance mates within 20 jumps.
This is definitely the kind of person we need to change the game to benefit. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
21
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 18:33:00 -
[25] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:The only person who is under threat from any kind of ship that can fit a covops cloak is a solo ratting idiot in a badly fit ship who has no corp or alliance mates within 20 jumps.
This is definitely the kind of person we need to change the game to benefit.
You are missing a rare and valuable opportunity.
Jump in a cloaked vessel, and hang out in the same system with them.
Using local chat, point out how they cannot see you not being able to see them.
They will leave the system in terror, being confronted with something they cannot see. |
Plyn
the recon inc
12
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 18:57:00 -
[26] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Why is this needed and what does it solve?
Cloaking and going AFK, requires the same amount of effort, that gathering intel from the local channel requires. The difference is that the psychological effects from AFKing are not guaranteed, whereas the intel from local is.
If you want a change/nerf to cloaking, then you should also add in changes to local. That is if you are actually after a balanced approach. Against breaking cloaks, which stuff like this would do, but I do have to mention that it does take more effort to gather intel from local than it does to afk cloak. If you are afk you can't see who's in local.
If something like this were ever implemented, and I think it won't, but if it were I'd at least like to see a stipulation where it only decloaked non covops cloaking devices.
Same goes for all the "special ship that can halfway probe out cloakies" and similar such suggestions. Come2Nullsec |
Mirima Thurander
Sarajevo Syndicate True Reign
250
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 20:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
remove local, now you don't know he's hidden in your system.
now you ether grow balls and keep doing your thing
or you run to high sec where its safe I love the the smell of victory in the morning. It smells like... Blood, vomit and burning flesh. I Like You. I'll Kill You Last. |
Akatenshi Xi
Elite Shadow Society ESS Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 20:25:00 -
[28] - Quote
Just leave cloaking as it is.
/thread |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
5557
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 23:03:00 -
[29] - Quote
Plyn wrote:Mag's wrote:Why is this needed and what does it solve?
Cloaking and going AFK, requires the same amount of effort, that gathering intel from the local channel requires. The difference is that the psychological effects from AFKing are not guaranteed, whereas the intel from local is.
If you want a change/nerf to cloaking, then you should also add in changes to local. That is if you are actually after a balanced approach. Against breaking cloaks, which stuff like this would do, but I do have to mention that it does take more effort to gather intel from local than it does to afk cloak. If you are afk you can't see who's in local. I disagree. Warping to a safe and walking away from the computer, requires more effort than looking at local and seeing who isn't blue.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |