| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ithica Ramlix
   |
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:45:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Ithica Ramlix on 09/12/2007 00:53:13
I'd like to start by saying that this is not a whine post, and this is not a place for carebears, or isk farmers to whine or flame me either. Having said that, know that this is my Main and am willing to take all positive and negative feedback from intelligent posters that wish to comment on this issue.
As someone that has both used cloaking extensively and seen cloaking exploited extensively, I feel that I am qualified to say that there are some issues with cloaking that would benefit from a change. These issue revolve around that fact that cloaking is impossible to counter in some situations, note that I did not say all.
I will start with the example of the much hated cloaking raven. While I not say that putting a cloak on a ratting ship with the intention of hiding is an exploit that fact remains that once cloaked in a Safe Spot a solo ratter is 100% immune to danger (until he decloaks at least). The fact that it is very easy to warp off and cloak before even the fastest ships can find you, warp to you, and scram you is somewhat unbalanced in my mind. I am of the opinion that once cloaked their should be ways of finding said ship, this would add a counter to the aforementioned cloaking raven and its ilk. This system of tackic and counter tactic is what makes games like this interesting because it keeps players thinking of new and innovative ways of achieving a goal. The more a game mechanic clamps down on innovation the more boring that game becomes.
Now, here is the counter. I have heard rummer that CCP is considering giving us probes for cloaked ships. Thats a start, but ships that on cloaked on the same grid with you will often times need a different solution. Start by making a cloak not only hide your ship from detection by also remove your tag (and count) from local. Next add a high slot ping generator that uses the same basic requirements as the normal probe launcher. This ping generator works like a ping in the ocean can be used to find a hidden sub. It makes the same sound as an underwater ping, and has ruffly the same animation as the expanding blue rings from the sensor booster, but it expands infinitely. If the pulse washes over an uncloaked ship a secondary ping (sound/quieter) is heard and a smaller ring reverberated off of it. If the pulse washes over a cloaked ship on grid with the ping generator, then the same effect is had but the ship is not decloaked. The size and volume of the echo ping depends on the size/role of the cloaked ship. This does not remove the value of having a cloak because cloaking can still be used to hide effectively if the hunters don't have a ping generator, and the hunters still must manually watch the ping locations to find the cloaked ship, so it is still player skill based. The added bonus fact that a cloak now would remove a players tag from local would also enhance ghost fleets, and ambush tactics (which are some of the coolest OPs I have seen in my time)because it actually becomes possible to hide one's numbers unless the enemy uses pinging scouts (the counter to ghost fleets).
If a target is not on grid with the ping, the ping can be used like the directional scanner to quickly survey a system for any cloaked signatures. Cloaked ships would not display their name or type, only the relative mass signature of the cloaked vassal. This means that it would be possible to deliberately fit out a ship to have a greater or smaller mass in order to fool an enemy pinger into thinking that a BC fleet was in system when in fact it was a fleet of nanoed battle ships.
The addition of these changes would greatly enhance the use of subterfuge and guile in small and large scale pvp operations. This would also go a long way towards solving the current reliance on shear weight of numbers to win fights, as battles would start to matter more about surprise and maneuver then who has more men.
As for the issue of logoffski...a 10 min logout timer regardless, would end this pathetic exploit.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:48:00 -
[2]
cloaking battleships can be changed slightly
specialized cloak ships can not in any way get any more cloak drawbacks
____ __ ________
_sig below_
devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
_lies above_
CCP Morpheus was here 
Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn
[yellow]Kaem |
voogru
Gallente
Massive Damage
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 01:27:00 -
[3]
Cloaking fix is easy:
1. Probes to detect ships that cloaked but not using cov ops cloaks.
2. Logging off leaves you probable for 15 minutes. You still 'emergency warp' to prevent dying to npcs while crashing but you can be probed out.
3. Logging off while cloaked, disables cloak, except on cov ops cloak.
4. Cov ops cloaks hide you from local until you open your big mouth.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
Miilitarized
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 01:40:00 -
[4]
You sir, are a cool cat. I love the idea of cloak taking you out of local chat. Just something to add though, if it's going to be like the submarine sonar, the opposing sub should be able to hear it too I think.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 01:54:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: voogru
Cloaking fix is easy:
1. Probes to detect ships that cloaked but not using cov ops cloaks.
2. Logging off leaves you probable for 15 minutes. You still 'emergency warp' to prevent dying to npcs while crashing but you can be probed out.
3. Logging off while cloaked, disables cloak, except on cov ops cloak.
4. Cov ops cloaks hide you from local until you open your big mouth.
I could go for everything except the last one. It gives Force Recon ships the ability to gank with impunity.
----
FREE Explorer
Lead Megalomanic
EVE Automated Influence Map |
Ithica Ramlix
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 02:43:00 -
[6]
Thx for the input so far.
As for the ping, yes I agree that the cloaked ship should here it too.
As for the rest, a little birdy told me that the devs have said they had plans to remove local all together... just unsubstantiated rumor at this point.
link plz anyone?
The quality is remembered long after the price is forgotten.
|
Una D
Ex Coelis
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 03:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Verite Rendition
Originally by: voogru
Cloaking fix is easy:
1. Probes to detect ships that cloaked but not using cov ops cloaks.
2. Logging off leaves you probable for 15 minutes. You still 'emergency warp' to prevent dying to npcs while crashing but you can be probed out.
3. Logging off while cloaked, disables cloak, except on cov ops cloak.
4. Cov ops cloaks hide you from local until you open your big mouth.
I could go for everything except the last one. It gives Force Recon ships the ability to gank with impunity.
Easy. Nerf force recons on that small thing and all is good :)
|
Elmicker
The Scope
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 03:38:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Elmicker on 09/12/2007 03:43:38
Originally by: Ithica Ramlix
As for the rest, a little birdy told me that the devs have said they had plans to remove local all together... just unsubstantiated rumor at this point.
I believe all that stems from a drunken oveur saying on evetv during the tournament before last something along the lines of "Local was never intended to be an intelligence tool and i'd like to see it changed". Luckily, there's more devs than just oveur who're slightly more sobre, most of the time. It'll never happen.
Also: Instead of just having cloaks probable on an absolute scale where everything is probable except cov. ops cloaks, s probability-based system should be implemented. Simply have a reducing chance based on increasing ship size and cloak quality. End result is essentially the same, except it prevents force recons from "ganking with impunity" while allowing them to stay safe as long as they don't go AFK  .
|
Daelorn
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 03:38:00 -
[9]
Big wall of text hurt my eyez.
|
Lord MuffloN
Caldari
Aggressive Tendencies
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 03:40:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Daelorn
Big wall of text hurt my eyez.
and so do your sig
Originally by: Jago Kain
If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on |
Daelorn
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 03:42:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Lord MuffloN
Originally by: Daelorn
Big wall of text hurt my eyez.
and so do your sig
YES BECAUSE A 400x120 DOESNT HURT BUT A 120x400 SIG DOES.
|
Spaceman Jack
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 08:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: voogru
Cloaking fix is easy:
1. Probes to detect ships that cloaked but not using cov ops cloaks.
3. Logging off while cloaked, disables cloak, except on cov ops cloak.
4. Cov ops cloaks hide you from local until you open your big mouth.
I would endorse this as an avid CovOps Cloaker
The only thing I would add is this:
- Skill required to probe cloaked ships (you need a skill to BE clokaed... only fair)
Maybe even take it further and make it more of a cat and mouse game by doing the following:
- Level of cloak/ops skill raises chance of avoiding detection by probe.
- Level of Cloak Probe skill raises chance of finding a cloaked vessel.
This makes the encounter skill based and hides any advantage one may have over the other.
|
Psorion
The Nine Gates
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 11:23:00 -
[13]
if something like this was used (pinging sonar) I think it should be restricted to the lock range of the ship using the module.
|
Zanarkand
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 11:34:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Zanarkand on 09/12/2007 11:35:53
Originally by: voogru
Cloaking fix is easy:
2. Logging off leaves you probable for 15 minutes. You still 'emergency warp' to prevent dying to npcs while crashing but you can be probed out.
See, 100% destruction of solo/small gang 0.0 pvp is just that easy!
|
Liam Liam
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 12:15:00 -
[15]
Ye but not on all ships
Destroyer only module ?
plus of course a pos module which pinpoints cloaked ships
sov 3 needed
and give the destroyer a large uncloaking range 150km or so
ie destroyers uncloak all ships with 150km of them
|
ViolenTUK
Gallente
Vindicated Exiles
101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 12:24:00 -
[16]
Cloaking devices should not be probable. They are cloaking devices and you shouldnĘt be able to detect them by any means possible. CCP arenĘt thinking about making cloaks probable but they are considering other methods.
I have suggested a decloaking pulse generator for destroyer class ships and also de-cloaking pulse modules for player owned station generators. These ideas are very good as they provide a way of revealing a cloaked vessel that is genuinely afk. The pulse generator for the destroyer class ship would reveal the cloaked vessel without actually provide a means of pinpointing the ship directly. I feel that any vessel once cloaked shouldnĘt be visible in local.
A cloaking device is a cloaking device simply put and as such it shouldnĘt matter what ship it is placed on the effect should be exactly the same. The covert ops cloaking device was made to provide an extra feature for a particular type of ship otherwise its just a cloaking device the same as the others.
www.eve-players.com |
Ash Vincetti
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 12:25:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Psorion
if something like this was used (pinging sonar) I think it should be restricted to the lock range of the ship using the module.
Agreed. Also, since it's some kind of a ping, have it bounce back from ALL ships on grid, up to the targeting range of the pinging ship, as well as smaller minor pings from GSC's, gates, etc.
-----
free bree! |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 12:31:00 -
[18]
You see, some small part of your idea has limited merits but simply using it will make:
a) gatecamps impassable without a equivalent or stronger force;
b) kill most of the activity by single players in low sec/0.0;
c) will make the usual band of "there is something I cant gank and kill in this system - I should get it" star another campaging to nerf cloaks even more.
Your pre-emptive strike labeling "carebears" and "isk farmers" who disagree with you is a good tactical move but don't make your idea good or balanced and who disagree with you play this game as much as you.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 13:14:00 -
[19]
No you see no one anywhere ever needs to rat if they're a real hardcore PvPer.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 13:31:00 -
[20]
Originally by: James Duar
No you see no one anywhere ever needs to rat if they're a real hardcore PvPer.
As PvP is a negative sum activity (at the end someone has less isk than before) it is not possible to sustain "hardcore PvP" for the majority of EVE player without changing the game to a FPS.
|
Gary Payne
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 11:35:00 -
[21]
well i dont think cloaks should be touched at all.. its not like a cloaked ship can pose a friggin problem. and yes it will kill people travelling into 0.0 trying to get a grip on the game if they can be probed out by every frig fleet gang in the game.. if your after ratters in 0.0 just get in a recon ship yourself and wait it out :D. wait for them to resume ratting an then spank em.. jeeze.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |