Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Trent0r
Caldari Ravenous Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 02:13:00 -
[1]
Ok, so as many of you know in the 0.0 environment, from time to time you may be faced upon an AFK (Away from keyboard for those of you that don't know) hostile sitting in your system. Their main intention of course, is to have the population of that system get used to him and possibly rat/mine/haul/do whatever they do in that system. Upon this happening the "AFK" cloaker would then strike, sometimes killing their opponent and sometimes failing, going back into their AFK status.
I don't know about the rest of you think, but these are some ideas about how we can ABOLISH AFK cloaking:
* Probes that can be used by probe launchers to scan down and locate the EXACT location of cloaked ships * A Starbase module that can scan down cloaked ships in the system * A Starbase module that can completely ELIMINATE cloaking in the ENTIRE system. A note on this one: This is fair! This would also allow the people that have sov in system/live in system be unable to safespot and cloak if an enemy gang comes along bigger than themselves. A sov requirement could also be an interesting idea in this aspect, as that would probably allow the best balance * Have ALL cloaking modules only be allowed to be active for a certain duration of time (so say 15min-30min), requiring the person that is cloaked to in a sense "refresh" their cloaking electronics.
Look, what I don't want to see in this thread is a bunch of people going: "Well you don't know what flying a recon is like, they aren't that strong, and afk cloaking is boring and sometimes you fail and blah blah.." and "Cloaking is part of the game and your trying to ruin it"
Listen, I FLY a pilgrim, and I know fully their capabilities, especially when well trained. I realize that cloaking is a part of the game and I am not opposed to it. What I am OPPOSED to is not being able to find someone cloaked when you may have the following equipment in a certain system:
* A station * Multiple Starbases * A level 4 sov!
|
Trent0r
Caldari Ravenous Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 02:14:00 -
[2]
Reserved for me.
|
Blooregazrd Kazoo
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 02:45:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Trent0r Look, what I don't want to see in this thread is a bunch of people going: "Well you don't know what flying a recon is like, they aren't that strong, and afk cloaking is boring and sometimes you fail and blah blah.." and "Cloaking is part of the game and your trying to ruin it"
Listen, I FLY a pilgrim, and I know fully their capabilities, especially when well trained. I realize that cloaking is a part of the game and I am not opposed to it.
http://www.eve-spirit.com/killboard/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=33288&view=ships_weapons
You Fail.
|
Trent0r
Caldari Ravenous Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 02:52:00 -
[4]
Thank you for your post, it helps the thread a lot. Also very bold of you to post with a npc corp alt. I admire your courage.
It's too bad that the data from our old killboard cant be put onto that new one, all my data from the new one is a bit skewed.
|
Blooregazrd Kazoo
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 04:19:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Trent0r Thank you for your post, it helps the thread a lot. Also very bold of you to post with a npc corp alt. I admire your courage.
It's too bad that the data from our old killboard cant be put onto that new one, all my data from the new one is a bit skewed.
from the old powmag isis:
Trent0r Nabaal Construction and Industrials Corp Most used Ship
* 30 - Rifter o 4 - Rifter o 4 - Phalanx Rocket o 4 - Rocket Launcher I o 3 - Foxfire Rocket o 2 - 250mm Light Artillery Cannon I o 2 - Small Nosferatu I o 2 - Warp Disruptor I o 1 - 125mm Gatling AutoCannon I o 1 - Stasis Webifier I * 11 - Falcon o 3 - 'Umbra' I White Noise ECM o 3 - BZ-5 Neutralizing Spatial Destabilizer ECM o 2 - Enfeebling Phase Inversion ECM I o 1 - 'Hypnos' Ion Field ECM I o 1 - 'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I
spies ftw!
|
Trent0r
Caldari Ravenous Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 04:27:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Trent0r on 18/11/2007 04:26:45 Anyone that would like to respond to this post in an intelligent manner is welcome. This forum troll/useless poster obviously doesn't have the intelligence to respond properly.
|
Sirius Problem
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 04:57:00 -
[7]
Some thoughts on cloaking:
1) Only Cov-Ops and Force Recon class should be able to fit cloaks. It's ridiculous that large combat ships can cloak. This would solve a lot of other cloaking-related problems, that we see other threads about.
2) Especially if #1 was true, I don't think you should be able to probe cloaked ships. Or, if you allow it, it must be very hard to do.
3) Perhaps cloaking needs to have a duration, with a period of time before you can recloak. -- Unless there has been a session change. This would allow you to travel cloaked. Skills could be introduced to increase cloaking duration and reduced the time between cloaking cycles.
4) Lets not bring the "nerf local" debate into it. There are different implications for 0.0, low-sec, and hi-sec. Simply removing local is not the answer.
---- Some people say I have a bad attitude. Those people are stupid.
|
Shaemell Buttleson
Darwin With Attitude oooh Shiny
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 11:13:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Blooregazrd Kazoo
Originally by: Trent0r Look, what I don't want to see in this thread is a bunch of people going: "Well you don't know what flying a recon is like, they aren't that strong, and afk cloaking is boring and sometimes you fail and blah blah.." and "Cloaking is part of the game and your trying to ruin it"
Listen, I FLY a pilgrim, and I know fully their capabilities, especially when well trained. I realize that cloaking is a part of the game and I am not opposed to it.
http://www.eve-spirit.com/killboard/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=33288&view=ships_weapons
You Fail.
I really don't see the point you are trying to make here.
*snip* Do not use your signature to troll or insult other EVE players even if the little turds deserve it! -Rauth Kivaro ([email protected]) |
Empire marketslave
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 12:43:00 -
[9]
how about a pos structure that will drop you 500 km from the cloaked ship after scanning it out that way you just need a bit of team work to figure out what direction you need to go
|
Flaming Candle
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 12:51:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Empire marketslave how about a pos structure that will drop you 500 km from the cloaked ship after scanning it out that way you just need a bit of team work to figure out what direction you need to go
500km from a cloaked ship is completely useless. actually, I don't think that statment is strong enough: There is no way in HELL that you are going to find a cloaked ship that is 500km away.
10km would be more useful, while remaining vaguely balanced; and if the cloaked ship is moving, then you have about as much chance of finding it as a needle in a haystack.
There already exists a POS module: the system scanning array, although it is practically useless, because no hostiles will stay in your system uncloaked without warping for long enough for you to get a decent hit.
|
|
ViolenTUK
Gallente Vindicated Exiles 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 12:54:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Trent0r
* Probes that can be used by probe launchers to scan down and locate the EXACT location of cloaked ships
There is no way I would ever be able to agree with probes being able to scan out a cloaked ship whether you had system sovereignty or not. Cloaked ships are cloaked and as such should not be able to be detected by any means at all.
I am sympathetic towards the idea of a player owned station fitted with a module that could give away an approximation of where a cloaked ship is IF the owner of the said player owned station held sovereignty. I still donĘt like the idea at all. Your are currently allowed to use a cloaking device anywhere in empire where sovereignty is held so adding restriction to 0.0 doesnĘt seem reasonable at all.
The whole premise of your post is based upon the intelligence gathered from local chat in my opinion you should not have access to at all. If you couldnĘt read local in 0.0 you wouldnĘt be making this post.
As for afk cloaking you canĘt tell me for sure whether he is afk or not. What you are doing is assuming he is afk because the pilot in your system who is cloaked is acting in a manner you presume to be afk. ItĘs this simple. You donĘt know if he is afk or not.
Originally by: Trent0r
* Have ALL cloaking modules only be allowed to be active for a certain duration of time (so say 15min-30min), requiring the person that is cloaked to in a sense "refresh" their cloaking electronics.
No. What you are doing here is nerfing cloaking. This isnĘt necessary at all. Cloaking is a completely legitimate tactic to gather intelligence on the activities of a hostile. If this type of change was introduced it would affect pilots playing the game who are fully at their computer and cognisant of what is happening in the system.
I say yet again local chat in 0.0 systems needs to be changed to constellation chat.
www.eve-players.com |
Lothros Andastar
Gallente Imperium Forces United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 13:30:00 -
[12]
there is nothing wrong with afk cloaking
|
Empyre
Domestic Reform Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 16:22:00 -
[13]
all i've got to say about it is this:
afk cloakers have been able to sit in systems, cloaked and afk, for however long they want. ccp has condoned this through inaction against their 'infiltrate and cause chaos at little to no expense' tactics.
well NOTHING comes without cost. and everything you do comes back to you. when jump haulers, cloaking BSs and covert cynos come out.. well, being a pain in the arse will have just gotten really easy and it will be time for a little payback.
The official goon buzz-kill. |
ViolenTUK
Gallente Vindicated Exiles 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 17:20:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Empyre
well NOTHING comes without cost. and everything you do comes back to you. when jump haulers, cloaking BSs and covert cynos come out.. well, being a pain in the arse will have just gotten really easy and it will be time for a little payback.
That made me smile. I understand completely. I cant wait.
www.eve-players.com |
Fel Wrath
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 18:51:00 -
[15]
Quote: No. What you are doing here is nerfing cloaking. This isnĘt necessary at all. Cloaking is a completely legitimate tactic to gather intelligence on the activities of a hostile. If this type of change was introduced it would affect pilots playing the game who are fully at their computer and cognisant of what is happening in the system.
The Idea is get rid of AFK cloakers not to nerf cloaking... I've seen these guys afk cloaked in upwards of 5+ days online 24 hours a day. I don't think there should be ways to completely eliminate cloaking but there should be a way to deter afk cloaking.
How about a variation on the probes Trentor: * Cloak disruption probes. Disrupt all cloaking fields within an area. If the cloaker is not an afker he can just re-cloak. If he is then say goodbye to the bad guy!
|
VJ Maverick
Caldari Maverick Specialized Services
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 19:32:00 -
[16]
Nerf Local. Cloaking is fine.
Originally by: Bodhisattvas
by the way you keep on missing the "a" from pwn, do you need any help with its pl |
Nachshon
Caldari Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 02:16:00 -
[17]
I have another idea for detecting cloaked ships - the Continuous Scan Array. This array is mounted on a station, and requires system sovereignty (and an operator with high Astrometrics skills). It doesn't do a one-time scan - it takes time to scan an area, longer depending how much area you want to scan (save time by cutting the radius or angle). The size of the cloaked ship is another factor - finding a cloaked battleship takes less time than finding a cloaked frigate. It does not pinpoint the location, but warps you in the general area. As you scan further, you get better readings. Using multiple CSAs accelerates the process.
To really pinpoint the ship requires a ship in the field with good sensors (probes aren't enough). This ship is warped in, and it works with the CSAs to precisely pinpoint the ship. The ship cannot be targeted, but it can be decloaked by bumping it.
I should mention that CSAs are also truly awesome scanners in other regards. But a ship being scanned should be able to know if it is being scanned. An active cloaker will move to another location if the scanners get close. Unless the system is bristling with CSAs and detector teams, a good cloaker should be able to evade the scanners. But AFK cloakers in Ravens will be located and eliminated fairly quickly (within an hour or two). ____________________________________ Caldari by birth, Minmatar by citizenship.
The True Meaning of Freedom |
Fel Wrath
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 05:01:00 -
[18]
Originally by: VJ Maverick Nerf Local. Cloaking is fine.
Thats just dirty but I like it!
|
Lagar
Caldari Core Domination
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 06:35:00 -
[19]
i am against the concept of taking down AFK'ers just for the sake that they are afk.. i mean what do you do when you have to eat but dont feal like loging of? will you just let them sitt there and alow anyone just warping in and kill him? honestly that would cause more harm than worth, HOWEVER:
if you do have * A station * Multiple Starbases * A level 4 sov!
i actualy have to agree, then cloaking should be able to be dissabled on a system basis forcing them to leave the 4 sov system however, cov ops should be an exeption of this rule to alow hostiles to recon your bases (otherwise no one would attack each other)
|
ViolenTUK
Gallente Vindicated Exiles 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 06:58:00 -
[20]
Disabled would be a little severe.
www.eve-players.com |
|
Josslyn
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 07:11:00 -
[21]
First off, anything that can use the Covops cloak should be safe, period. If you were to havea way to probe out cloaked ships, covops and force recons should be immune. With that said, it would be easy enough to do the following: Idea: Increase penalties for fitting a cloak, and possibly tie them to ship size. Also, give ships that need to use cloaks like stealth bomber bonuses to counter the new penalties
|
Naviset
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 09:27:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Naviset on 19/11/2007 09:29:19
Originally by: Flaming Candle
Originally by: Empire marketslave how about a pos structure that will drop you 500 km from the cloaked ship after scanning it out that way you just need a bit of team work to figure out what direction you need to go
500km from a cloaked ship is completely useless. actually, I don't think that statment is strong enough: There is no way in HELL that you are going to find a cloaked ship that is 500km away.
10km would be more useful, while remaining vaguely balanced; and if the cloaked ship is moving, then you have about as much chance of finding it as a needle in a haystack.
There already exists a POS module: the system scanning array, although it is practically useless, because no hostiles will stay in your system uncloaked without warping for long enough for you to get a decent hit.
10km is ******** easy. 50km, okay, 10km, no.
I don't really think theres anything wrong with cloaking up tbh... Carebears hate it but carebears hate everything that have anything to do with dying or interrupt their ability to make isk..
Just have eve kick people out of the game who enter no commands for 30 minutes.
|
Connor Banks
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 11:44:00 -
[23]
My ideas regarding cloaking:
1. Cloaking in general works as it should. 2. Perhaps there should be a capacitor cost when using a cloaking device? A reasonable cost would be that you can permanently run the cloaking device if you sacrifice additional slot(s) to support the capacitor (much like micro warp drives or shield boosters).
3. Anti-cloaking devices is something to be considered. However, for obvious reasons no single ship should be able to mount or use an anti-cloaking device.
4. Perhaps (somewhat contradicting statement 3) only objects with enough powergrid and capacitor (a station?)should be able to detect cloaked ships and decloak them.
5. I also think that detecting should be separated from decloaking. That is, either two separate devices or one device requiring two kind of scripts...much like the future sensor dampeners.
/Connor
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Karjala Inc. Onnenpyora
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 12:11:00 -
[24]
ban afking at stations.
|
ViolenTUK
Gallente Vindicated Exiles 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 12:49:00 -
[25]
Im more open to the idea of 0.0 systems that hold sovereignty being able to emit a de-cloaking pulse. This would decloak the cloaked ship in a certain area of effect. An afk cloaker wouldnĘt re-cloak as he is afk but someone who is watching his or her screen would be able to re-cloak.
www.eve-players.com |
Sinder Ohm
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 14:46:00 -
[26]
Originally by: ViolenTUK Im more open to the idea of 0.0 systems that hold sovereignty being able to emit a de-cloaking pulse. This would decloak the cloaked ship in a certain area of effect. An afk cloaker wouldnĘt re-cloak as he is afk but someone who is watching his or her screen would be able to re-cloak.
You mean like a ping used to find submerged submarines, thats probably the best idea Ive seen sofar. As you said if he is afk he wont reactivate cloak and will be found and killed. If not the target will most likely just fly to a new safe spot and repeat. |
Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr Do Or Die And Live Or Try
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 15:04:00 -
[27]
Just increase local to cover an entire constallation. That way, you don't know if the AFK cloaker is in your system or not. But you will still know a hostile is in the vicinity. Only real problem is that you get lax. That will always get you killed and has nothing to do with AFK cloaking. If you don't keep an eye on the map, won't you be an easy kill for a gate camp? Should gates be removed or should there be a button on the sending gate to fire a doomsday device at the receiving gate to eliminate the camp?
If you know there is an AFK cloaker in your system, don't go lax. Teamup, work togeather and deny the cloaker his kills. Just like the allies did in WWII against the german submarines.
|
Tanya Kunoichi
Caldari Death Monkey's With Knives
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 16:06:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Tanya Kunoichi on 19/11/2007 16:08:38 Im for removing local but back to the topic.
The cloaked pilot in the ship dont risks anythink. He can just sit there and gather intel. There is no counter.
Usualy there are several cloaked ships when they prepare to attack people in belt but that can be countered with a defense gang.
Cloaked alt (you need just basic t1 ship+simple cloak) you get intel whenever you want without any risk. So the risk:reward is not balanced.
*There can be modified cloaks which work only on covert ops but consume cap. DEFINITELY NOT meant to insta run the cloak with cap recharge.
*Cloaks for normal ships but can be probed only with cloaks or recons and a new skill would be needed.
*SOV 4 would mean of increased cap usage on cloaked ship as more power would be diverted to sustain cloak.
So coverts woud have less time then usual. And normal ships would be now limited also with additional timer.
Cloaking is for espionage and defense if encountering heavy presence. But it shouldnt be misused permanently couse cloaked pilot dont takes any risk in safespot when moving.
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 16:16:00 -
[29]
If got a serious idea, that wont screw up active pilots and can deal with cloaking BS and afk cloaker:
Cloak Resonance Scan Probe: Range: 999AU Flight Time: 1800secs scan duration penalty:0.25 (this will lead to a scan time of 2400 secs on an unbonused ship, and a scan time of 720 secs on a maxed skilled cov ops without rigs) Scan strength:1000 can only detect ships with active cloak
problem would be to uncloak if they are moving, still have no good idea for that, maybe make the probe able to uncloak with a pulse that will destroy the probe but uncloak ONE of the found ships. like this:
put out probe, scan, after you found him, warp to his grid, hit the "pulse" so he gets visible and you can catch him
|
Empyre
Domestic Reform Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 17:56:00 -
[30]
Originally by: VJ Maverick Nerf Local. Cloaking is fine.
if they came up with a decent planet surface playing system and got rid of gates (which would become even more so choke points of death) then i would be for it.
i could just imagine ducking behind a planet or moon to avoid a radar sweep. could give eve a whole new level of play.
The official goon buzz-kill. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |