|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
   |
Posted - 2008.04.05 02:36:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: CCP Greyscale
One of my concerns with just making cloaked ships probeable with any decent degree of accuracy is the impact it has on using covert ops as fleet warp-in points. If you can get within 15km of the cloaked ship, you can get an interdictor right on top of the incoming fleet with minimal effort. Also, consider the current balance between recon probes and exploration probes, particularly WRT sensor strengths and resulting signal strengths.
So you have to scan the cov-ops out without him knowing it in 30 seconds, warp the cov-ops on their cov-ops. Warp the dictor to the landed cov-ops. And dictor the still cloaked cov-ops all at the right time to catch a warping fleet and without the cov-ops noticing or flying too far for the bubble to miss the fleet?[or your dictor has a probe and it takes longer than 30 seconds]
Doesn't seem like much of a threat to me. Especially since most fleets will not be warping to zero on their cov-ops so either you time it really really really well, in which case congrats.
Or you don't catch the fleet since the fleet will be warping in at 10-100km.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.05 22:00:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri
Exactly what is the "problem" that is caused by these cloakers? If they are afk they certainly aren't bothering anyone. They pay for the right to be logged in 23x7, just like anyone else.
If they are not afk, they have significant penalties for operating the cloak and they are probably very outnumbered and a small mistake will cost them a ship.
This entire topic sounds like bullies looking for a bigger advantage over the little guy.
Cloaking isn't broken. It doesn't need fixing.
Fly safe.
When you cloak for 23/7 you invalidate the work that people have done defending space. Because of your complete impunity this removes any form of intel that the defenders can do to protect themselves. As a rule, its pretty much impossible to defend ratters and miners from attack, someone will die with just a small amount of gank before your defense gang will be able to lock and apply logistics.
A good example of this working in the game is when PL ruined the RIT triangle for rise. And i don't mean "they kinda got in the way" i mean, they went there, cloaked, and killed an entire alliances production and morale to the point that some of the most heavily defended and isolated space in the game fell as soon as a modicum of pressure was applied.
The key? There was nothing that the alliance of 1000 could do to kill the cloakers in their systems
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
...
No, see that is the thing, it really is that simple.
...
Yes it is, namely: remove cloaked ships from local, both ways (i.e. cloaker will not see local either).
P.S. This post is only aimed at people who think it's "that simple".
No, removing cloaked ships from local is stupid, just as stupid as removing local. It skews the game much to far from the defender to the attacker and invalidates any effort anyone has done to secure their space.
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
Originally by: Goumindong
So you have to scan the cov-ops out without him knowing it in 30 seconds, warp the cov-ops on their cov-ops. Warp the dictor to the landed cov-ops. And dictor the still cloaked cov-ops all at the right time to catch a warping fleet and without the cov-ops noticing or flying too far for the bubble to miss the fleet?[or your dictor has a probe and it takes longer than 30 seconds]
How about co-ops seting covert cyno??
And yes, If you warp near the bubble, and your warp vecotor came through bubble, you'll get cuaught in bubble anyway, even if you said warp to 100km.
Only if you start the warp while the bubble is up and only if your vector goes through the bubble and only if the warp in point is within 150km of the bubble.
The key part is that you have to initiate the warp while the bubble is up in order to be pulled in. So if you are warping to the cov-ops the bubble has to come up at the right time as he says warp, but before people warp, and before he is able to tell everyone to not warp because he is bubbled.
This window is going to be very small.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
 Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.05 22:53:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
No, removing cloaked ships from local is stupid, just as stupid as removing local. It skews the game much to far from the defender to the attacker and invalidates any effort anyone has done to secure their space.
Just as stupid as cloaked ships showing up in local and probes scanning down cloaked ships on top of that. It skews the game much to far from the wise pilots to the mindless blobs and invalidates any effort anyone has done to try to stay covert.
No, you can still stay covert, you just can't do it while you are AFK. It would take at least two scans and likely 3 scans to pin the location of any non-afk cloaking ship in that time if you cannot find them[they have to decloak to probe] and avoid them [starting the cycle over again], then you don't deserve to be using a cov-ops cloak.
Currently there is pretty much no effort involved in cloaking. I can take any ship and be 100% safe anywhere for any amount of time simply by training one skill and sticking a cloak on whatever ship i want.
Cloaked ships not showing up in local would destroy all low-sec and 0.0 belt based production. It would destroy all pvp that did not include cloaked ships. It would make recons so mind numbingly overpowered its all anyone would fly.
No, cloaking is stupidly easy and provide utterly ridiculous benefits to the person using it. It makes for a bad game and should be nerfed to hell and back.
Eve is not a single player game that just happens to have other participants, eve is a game that has many different players doing many different things and you need to carefully balance between those options.
The inability to defend yourself while mining or ratting in any way is unacceptable[cloaks not appearing in local].
The ability of any ship to be 100% safe from everything while logged on is unacceptable[cloaks not being able to be scanned].
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.05 23:39:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Vadimik
Ever heard of docking and POS'es ? 
Yes, ever heard of sieging and dreadnoughts?
None of these things are invulnerable, you always have the option of getting together a force and knocking it down and taking it for yourself.
You cannot do the same to cloaks.
Originally by: AKULA UrQuan
Edited by: AKULA UrQuan on 05/04/2008 23:08:22
First off. Covert ops frigates are one of the harder ships to probe out when they're uncloaked. Gets better when the pilot (me for example) does something goofy like toss in a T2 backup array in a low slot. Good luck probeing him then much less getting a zero error scan.
Second. Any competent covert pilot isn't going to be sitting still at 0m/s when AFK. He's going to be putting along on normal drives in a random direction 6+ AUs away from any solar object.
Third. WTZ isn't. It has an error range of -/+2,500 meters best I can tell. If you don't decloak him on warpin now what? If the target is moveing you get to try again.
Last. Most of these, so called, AFK coverts arn't as AFK as you would like to think.
So yeah. Allow for probeing cloakers. Only people that are getting caught are the clueless ones.
Precisely
There is a damn lot of effort involved in not just fueling POS, but sieging the owners territory, putting your own down, and keeping them alive.
And when you are at these POS you are vulnerable to scouting, and when in a station you are at an easy choke with no access to your directional scanner and overview.
Quote:
Yes, covert. With my face shining up in local. Sure.
Yup. Sorry, but imperfect role play is the price payed for balance.
Quote:
No, logging off is stupidly easy and provide utterly ridiculous benefits to the person using it. It makes for a bad game and should be nerfed to hell and back.
You cannot actively scan and participate in the game when logged off.
Now, if you want to have a 30 second timer on decloaking, be unable to use local, all chat channels, your overview, your entire user interface, the directional scanner, all modules, and ping as "cloaked" on peoples user lists, then its about a right comparison.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 18:03:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
Guerrillas and saboteurs exist in real life, why they shouldnt be allowed in EVE?
I actualy dont like the idea that cyno jammer able to jamm covert cyno. Would be more sence if covert cyno will be able to operate under in system wit cyno jammer.[/uote]
Spaceships capable of traveling faster than the speed of light don't exist in real life, why should they be allowed in eve?
Covert cynos being jammed by cyno jammers is another issue altogether and not something relating to cloaking. The specific problem is that cyno jammers exist to make capital movement more complicated and part of overall strategy, and covert cynos can't bring in capital ships. So the jammers are doing more than their fair share.
Quote:
It will make game more hardcore like, and less arcade. I dont wont any changes thats make EVE like WoW (for example).
Removing cloaker from local will be great change. IMHO stealth wars should be boosted alot.
Adapt to survive...
This is not an argument. Letting people probe cloakers will not make eve any less hardcore or more arcade or more like WoW. If anything, the ability to be perfectly safe in any space for any amount of time is a mechanic that has made eve less hardcore, because anyone can just cloak and not have to worry about any force ever.
Quote:
If dictor will drop bubble (or HiC start it) at close proximity to co-ops, the fleet vector will go through bubble anyway, no matter from what location they warp, and so everyone will be caught in bubble anyway
I just freaking explained this to you. You are only caught in a bubble when
1: Your vector overlaps the bubble
2: Your warp in point is within 150km of the bubble
3: Your warp in point is on the same grid as the bubble
4: You initiate warp while the bubble is active
4 is the key here, if you don't initiate warp while the bubble is active the bubble wont pull you out of warp, you might land in it, but you would have been landing in it anyway.
So, in order to catch the incoming gang you have to put the bubble up after the cov-ops tells the FC its safe to warp in. But before the FC gang warps, or tells people to warp and they warp, and before the cov-ops cancels the warp order because the bubble is up. This is a very small window to get a bubble on a cov-ops and would pretty much require omniscience, or a very good spy[because you have to be aware of the warp in time to scan the cov-ops down, warp to the result and then warp a dictor to the result which they can then bubble]
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
Originally by: Goumindong
None of these things are invulnerable, you always have the option of getting together a force and knocking it down and taking it for yourself.
Stations not invulnerable?)
And how many stations you destroyed already?
Stations are not invulnerable, though you don't destroy them you take them for your own. Assets in them are essentially lost.
Originally by: Vadimik
But cloaks aren't invulnerable either, it's the cloaked ship you can't do anything about.
Same story with docked or POS'ed ship.
You can't do anything unless he undocks.
You can't do anything unless he uncloaks (well, or unless you wait for after DT when he will be forced to log on and be cloakless for some time thereafter).
You can't do anything unless he leaves POS field (well, or unless he sits there for 1,5-2 days it takes to take the POS down).
Yes, you can, you can bubble the POS and siege it, not only destroying the POS, but also destroying anything that attempts to come in, attempts to leave, or anything that was in the shields at the time of the destruction.
Ditto stations. You're right, the target could log off and never log on again and never undock[being unable to fit, clone, repair etc]
Quote:
Ok, if keeping you covert is a kind of "RP side-effect" of a covert ops cloak, what's it's "main effect" ?
To be a tactical tool in the operation and prosecution of combat.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 18:05:00 -
[6]
Originally by: maralt
This is just another try for carebears and ppl who travel in 0.0 without proper protection to make it safer and has nothing to do with afk cloakers. Its about giving ppl the ability to probe out hostile scouts on gates and cloaking gangs camping systems looking for kills. The cloakers who go afk for maybe a RL issue are no threat and would be at best an easy kill for prober's while an active player would be able to warp off.
Cloaks already have enough negative effects and do not need to be probable unless your a carebear looking for easier travel through low sec or 0.0 or a crappy pvper looking for easy kills.
Tell that to Rise, i am sure that they think that AFK cloakers are totally not a problem ever.
Oh wait, you can't, the entire alliance was killed by AFK cloakers.
Its about giving people the ability to defend their space.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 19:53:00 -
[7]
Originally by: maralt
Defend space?, just how much dps does an AFK cloaker put out that they can wipe out an entire alliance?.
If an alliance dies because of AFK cloakers then it deserved to die, you really want eve to be played in uber easy mode don't ya bud?.
If you can't make money you can defend your space. We have dedicated forces that essentially sit in all the good ratting and mining systems of the enemy cloaked all day. They're invulnerable and the risks of deploying ratters and miners goes up so far its not ever worth it.
Your last comment is especially funny because cloaks are the "uber easy mode" They only fight when they want, the mechanics make intelligence gathering useless and they don't fight their own.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 20:33:00 -
[8]
Originally by: maralt
So you think that your miners cannot or should not be guarded and that hostiles in your systems that cannot dock or be safe anywhere should sit in a system outnumbered and get probed down and killed?. Also that every fight they start could be a potential trap?.
I think you should take yourself to empire buddy cos 0.0 is to rough for you it seems, and planning and team work seem totally beyond you.
That miners cannot be guarded is not an issue of should. Its an issue of cost, ability, and the lack of contiguous battlefields.
No, they should not stick around waiting to get killed. They should either be active in which case they wont be killed, they should leave, or log.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 20:41:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Goumindong on 06/04/2008 20:41:52
Originally by: Vadimik
And the target inside the POS can log off and disappear long before you finish the POS off, no matter how many bubbles you drop aroud it. And then log on right after DT and warp away.
Only if you log on slower than they do.
Quote:
Cloakers you are so worried about can fit, clone and repair while cloaked ? 
No, they can scan, move, identify, and prepare to attack targets.
Quote:
You are saying that you managed to deny your enemy all profits by placing afk cloakers in his systems... Who exactly are you fighting, some religious sects that are forbidden by oaths from anything that is not a perfectly refined absolutely risk-free carebearing ?
No, alliances that take risks all the time. Not all risks are the same, and if you make the action risky enough, then the payoff for making that choice becomes a negative.
This means that optimal play becomes to not ever produce because taking that action will, on average, return a loss on the operation. Furthermore, lower risk options such as mission running in empire easily become more profitable
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ok, if keeping you covert is a kind of "RP side-effect" of a covert ops cloak, what's it's "main effect" ?
To be a tactical tool in the operation and prosecution of combat.
Your ability to make statements that don't actually mean anything is quite admirable.
No, it has meaning. Not specific meaning like "you will use it to hide your force size and strength, give tactical measures for entering a battle based on time, and provide an faster way to enter the battlefield from a non-combat location than warping." I just ran out of space
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 20:44:00 -
[10]
Originally by: maralt
0.0 should be just like empire then huh dud?. Nice and safe for carebears......
No, why do you want to make safer than empire? Nice and safe for suicide gankers except they don't even have to lose their ships?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
|
|
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 20:56:00 -
[11]
Originally by: maralt
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt
0.0 should be just like empire then huh dud?. Nice and safe for carebears......
No, why do you want to make safer than empire? Nice and safe for suicide gankers except they don't even have to lose their ships?
Do mining ops with guards/ewar and logistics and deal with life in 0.0 or go back to empire.
You will lose hulks before you can move forces, you will need to protect the gang for a portion of time wildly disproportionate than the effort needed to kill those miners.
The cost of fielding the forces to do this actually means that you would be more profitable mining in empire.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 21:10:00 -
[12]
Originally by: maralt
If you cannot organize a good guarded and profitable mining op you should go back to empire tbh. Cos it costs nothing to sit in a belt in around miners in a pvp or logistic ship.
Yea, and you can sell your ore for whatever you want and still make money because "i mined it myself"
Do you understand the concept of opportunity cost?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 21:20:00 -
[13]
Originally by: maralt
More than you seem to understand team work it seems, 0.0 is not supposed to be safe especially in war time but your whining about not being able to work solo in belts in the most hostile areas in eve while at war.... are you for real?????.
Since you understand it so well, how come you have documented evidence in this thread of you not understanding it?
No one is saying that 0.0 is supposed to be safe, which is exactly why cloaking is such a problem
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 21:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Vadimik
Oh noes, a covert ops can actually rely intel and a force recon can actually warp cloaked...
That you fail to see the implications of that are staggering. P.S. nothing in scanning down cloakers prevents them from doing either of those things. What it prevents them from doing is going AFK or sitting around not moving. It prevents them from projecting force when they are not at the keyboard.
They can project force when not at the keyboard because the other side has to act as if they are at all times.
Quote:
If someone finds the risks of 0.0 too great, he is free to leave. Others will come and take his place. Only if I see systems actually going empty forever due to afk cloakers in them, and going empty on a massive scale, I'll admit that there might be an issue.
That is not how the mechanic works.
Quote:
Hide your forces ? How, if you still show up in local ?
When see someone in local what do you know about them?
What don't you know?
What information you don't know does the cloak prevent from being attained?
Quote:
So the only role of a covert ops cloak is to provide warp-ins in the short gap of time you have before you have been scanned down ?
What do they do after they scan you down? Magic you to death? How do they prevent you from simply moving again?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 21:39:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Vadimik
Edited by: Vadimik on 06/04/2008 21:35:35
Ok, so now it burns down to really afk cloakers again ?
The guys that are not at the keyboard, and those mere shadows in local scare people to death.
I said it before and I'll say it now:
The only reason why afk cloaking works is cause people metagame by using local in a way CCP never intended, and the only thing afk cloakers do is metagame the said people back.
If someone can't deal with drawbacks of metagaming tactics they use, last thing CCP should do is sort out bugs they have spawned inside their own heads.
What happens to the game without that ability?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 21:55:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Vadimik
Edited by: Vadimik on 06/04/2008 21:40:58
Originally by: Goumindong
What happens to the game without that ability?
It becomes a better place free of at least some of lame-*** metagaming.
No, try again, this time try to include the actions that players might take and the effect these actions would have on the game.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 22:04:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
No, try again, this time try to include the actions that players might take and the effect these actions would have on the game.
That's exactly how I came to my conclusion.
It can't be, because your conclusion includes no reference to either the actions or their effects.
Do you have an argument or are you just wasting peoples time?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 22:14:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Goumindong on 06/04/2008 22:14:22
That is not an argument with regards to what would happen if that mechanic changed.
You understand what "metagame" means right?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 22:26:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
Edited by: Goumindong on 06/04/2008 22:14:22
That is not an argument with regards to what would happen if that mechanic changed.
I have already clearly stated my opinion on what would happen if that mechanic is changed.
And, thankfully, I'm not going to try to persuade anyone that my opinion on something that is yet to happen is the only possible truth. You just can't know for sure about things that have not happened yet.
Opinion without inference is not worth anything. What is the inference, what leads you to believe that this would be the result. What actions to you believe players would take that would make this change do what you say?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.06 23:43:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
Opinion without inference is not worth anything. What is the inference, what leads you to believe that this would be the result. What actions to you believe players would take that would make this change do what you say?
Players will play without relying on a chat tab as a main source of intel, covert ships will actually become covert, players that can't play unless they are given total safety will move to highsec or out of EvE. That's to name a few things.
But what will they do and what choices will they make?
Are you so dense that you can not understand the concept of choice?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
|
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 01:22:00 -
[21]
No, its not. This time try and define the choice in a manner that can inform the recipient of the information what the people have actually chosen.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 12:32:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: Goumindong
But what will they do and what choices will they make?
Are you so dense that you can not understand the concept of choice?
They will do whatever they feel like doing, most likely - adapt, or die.
For the second time in only this thread you resort to personal attack to try to invalidate my point.
There is nothing I can do to argue the "you just don't perceive it the way I do" position.
I'm done having any meaningful conversation with you, next time try not to resort to "think about it till you see I'm right" style (that is, if you want to actually have a discussion).
No, i am seriously concerned that you are not grasping basic concepts required to make these determinations
You have not once demonstrated that you are able to answer a simple question with regards to what happens based on this change. You have not figured why the change makes the game better, you have not figured the choices that people make with regards to your answer.
In order to know what will happen you have to actually look at the choices people make and the choices that they are likely to make after the change.
"Adapt or die" is not a choice.
But since you wont answer the question ill answer it for you.
Everyone will use cloaking ships everywhere to do anything, the ability to not be seen in local, is so strong that any way to circumvent it will lead to a massive migration of combat ships towards that style.
No one will rat or produce in 0.0, the risks will simply be too great, there will be one type of 0.0 production and it will be moon mining. All the proceeds from this will fly to and from high sec with the use of jump bridges and cynos.
There will be no ratters and miners to kill, because no one will be ratting or mining, because there will be no efficient way to ensure they are not killed by cloaking ships. There will be very few combat ships to kill, because no one will be in combat ships without a cloak, the game will become bait and switch with whomever has the most cloaked ships on the other side of the bait winning.
That or it will be a siege.
The only reason that there is no use arguing is because you refuse to go through the steps necessary to have a civil discussion.
Quote:
For the second time in only this thread you resort to personal attack to try to invalidate my point.
No, you dont have a point, that is the problem. You make no argument you just say "oh it will be great". It is impossible to prove a negative in the same manner that is it impossible to disprove an opinion founded on no argument in the same way it is impossible to argue against an argument that doesn't exist.
Now quit trolling and tell me what the players are going to do that will make the game better or leave the discussion to those who are willing to take the time to think about it.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 12:34:00 -
[23]
Originally by: maralt
Ignore him bud my kids went through the why, why, why stage as well if you keep answering he will keep asking.
Anyway on topic, the local chat already give ppl a heads up as to what is in the system and also tells you what alliance they are with along with sec status and age. To allow probes to find cloaked ships would only hurt those who were genuinely afk for a real emergency while those hunting outnumbered in a hostile system would just be blobbed as cloaking is there only way of being safe.
Why should cloaked ships be able to genuinely be able to go afk? Why should they not just log like everyone else has to when deep in hostile territory?
Why are cloaks limited to those who are out-numbered in a hostile system?
And when you are done with those gaping holes in your argument you can tell me the details of mechanics of cloaking that push the advantage to the aggressor in a situation where any one target does not have a cloak.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 20:41:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Ulstan
Edited by: Ulstan on 07/04/2008 20:25:02
Just change local so you have no way of knowing who else is there with you.
Now you will never worry about that afk cloaker somewhere because you don't know that he's even there@!
Other way around, you would be forced to play as if he were there all the time.
Lack of information =/= the knowledge of absence.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 23:50:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Goumindong on 07/04/2008 23:52:23
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 07/04/2008 21:27:28
Originally by: Goumindong
Other way around, you would be forced to play as if he were there all the time.
Lack of information =/= the knowledge of absence.
PPL should be playing like that in a war zone anyway, empire is for the ppl who need security for themselves and consequences for the aggressors/attackers for free.
So 0.0 should be like empire if you fit a cloak? I thought 0.0 was for people who are acting like its a warzone?
Originally by: Agnemon
Make it possible to probe cloakers, the degree of probe ability scaled to the ships cloak ability (Cov- Ops significantly harder to probe than haulers with a cloak)
Add a third tier of cloaking, skill and module based that allows you to put a cov-ops cloak into a deep cloak state, unable to be probed but stiff penalties, no warping, massive speed hit, significant recalibration hit when moving out of deep cloak into standard cloak mode, only available on covert ops cloaks, or as a faction cloak.
I could make all sorts of comments about super hero hauler gankers in cloaked recons, but I won't 
why shouldn't the cloakers just log off?
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 03:01:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Commander 598
Edited by: Commander 598 on 08/04/2008 02:41:52
How are AFK cloakers a problem if they're AFK?
(Also, not voting Goumindong for CSM due to this issue.)
Because you need to treat them as if they are not. I.E. they can project power without being active.
If you do not, you will lose ships and will lose profitability.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 18:19:00 -
[27]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
If, what, how, lol get out of your armchair and go kill stuff and get some xp in pvp. What part of every gank could be a trap did you not understand?. And why would a large blob that outnumbered the guys need cloaks?.
If the cloakers stay cloaked they are no threat but if they uncloak to attack they get targeting penalties that allow a aligned ship to warp out, and also stand a very good chance of getting ganked themselves if its a trap or the guy is guarded.
O.K. so in order to kill you, the enemy needs to have enough forces deployed so that they can set traps 23/7 and be able to get enough forces to the target before you kill it without tipping you off or letting you escape?
Do you even play this game?
Either they will see you coming and leave, kill your bait before you arrive, or you have to use cloaking ships and maintain a vigil in order to win.
Its a ridiculous onus.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 18:39:00 -
[28]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
If the attackers are ready and willing to hit ships in the system 24/7 why should the defenders be able to ignore them and continue to mine?. So yes when hostiles are in system they should have guards if they wanna carebear, welcome to 0.0 btw its not supposed to be safe to solo mine or rat.
Yes i play the game and have done since 2003 but i do not play it or wish to play it in easy mode like you do it seems.
1. If they leave before i arrive then i win cos im there to mine or rat so im still making money.
2. If they kill my bait/carebear its my fault for planning the trap or guarding badly
3. Most corps/alliances use cloakers but for summat like this a close pos is enough for guarding the carebear or even sitting on grid uncloaked as deterrent will work.
Because the attackers don't have to be ready and willing to attack 23/7. They only need to be ready and willing to attack when they want and where they want. They could be making dinner for all it mattered. But because they could be ready to attack and there is no indication of change, the defenders must act like they are.
So the defenders have to defend 23/7 and the attackers have to do nothing.
1. No, if you leave before they arrive you tie, because they still have to defend and have caused you no damage
2. Or the cloakers simply have more force than you
3. No its not. Because you have cost involved in defending these ops. Not only is it not fun, but since you could be mining you are losing money. It only makes sense if those folks are AFK. But if they are AFK they are not doing their job.
With miners its that even with forces on grid, a cloaking gang will be able to destroy a hulk before you can respond.
Quote:
Yes i play the game and have done since 2003 but i do not play it or wish to play it in easy mode like you do it seems.
Yea, you don't want to play in easy mode, which is why you argue for all ultra low-risk endeavors to be maintained or enhanced!
For some reason i don't believe you.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 19:23:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Goumindong on 08/04/2008 19:23:49
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Welcome to being on the offensive in war, you get to choose when and where you fight its great ain't it
so 1 hour reinforcement timers on ships then?
Quote:
I said if they leave before my forces/trap arrive's are you blind?. So the ability to continue to make isk is a win.
No, its a tie, but more of a loss for the defenders. Because you must continue to field the trap. This costs you money.[opportunity cost of playing the game and not producing]
The cloaker can go afk this does not cost him money[is not playing the game]. Only his actual activity time costs him money.
So then, in order to cause him damage you need to destroy his ship, and in order to increase your production you need to get to a state where you do not have to waste forces defending.
Quote:
Only a moron rats/mines with a larger hostile force camped in local, cloaked or not
Yes, which is why the cloaking mechanics are messed up because you cannot prevent that when they are cloaked and because you cannot prevent that when they are cloaked its impossible to produce 0.0 if someone dumps a decent sized cloaking force in your systems and then rides bikes
And it would get even worse if local functionality were removed or reduced.
Quote:
So you make less cos of paying the security neededRolling Eyes my heart bleeds for the rich carebears
So you want a system where profits are explicitly lower than empire and risks are explicitly higher? That seems kinda dumb.
Quote:
Logistics, ewar, dpsShocked guarding your miners ftw (hey look a balanced and mixed fleet wins again).
The things im defending are only low risk if your facing total morons so skill up, team up and suck it up.ugh
so 30% of your mining fleet is going to be guardians sitting at the keyboard 100% of the time? And you still need DPS and miners?!
Wow, thats really efficient!
Have you ever been on a mining op? Do you understand how they work?
Do you realize you are asking for for a 23 to 1 or more effort ratio for them to defend against anyone with a cloak?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 20:12:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Goumindong on 08/04/2008 20:13:58
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 08/04/2008 19:51:24
1 hour reinforcment timers?. lol just lol.
Well, you're the one who suggested it.
[Edit: i suppose i should qualify this. This is a game, and games require that players be online. This is why we schedule pos fights, because otherwise you could go to bed and lose a system.[I.E. station ping pong]. You are suggesting essentially this, so the natural progression of "attackers get to attack whenever they want" is "defenders get a timer to schedule the battle". Hence 1 hour reinforcement timers on ships]
Quote:
The guards can be paid for there time you make less but you all make summat the cloaker does not= you win.
No, the cloaker is not even on the grid, he is afk, he is doing other things that are profitable to him more than playing the game. By definition it is impossible for him to be profiting more than he could be when at the game.
Quote:
If the cloaker is afk you are making money and so are your guards, and he is not = you win.
No, because you could be making more money having everyone mine in empire in a noob corp.
Quote:
Your alliance should have enough ppl to defend your carebears in carebear ops from cloakers or they suck and you should find another alliance, btw ive never seen a huge cloaker blob camping a system so please stop with the arm chair what ifs its silly.
You might not have, but I have. Furthermore you seem to fail to understand what opportunity cost is.
can you please define what opportunity cost is and how it applies to the above situation?
Quote:
Profits are never less mining or ratting in 0.0 than in empire stop drama queening but yes the risks should be a lot higher hence the guards needed.
profits are a factor of time and players. So every player that you need to defend is not producing this means that the time and players goes down for each person. So even at a lower rate, a higher number of producers means that your actual profits go up.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
|
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 20:30:00 -
[31]
Tell that to Rise...
oh wait, you can't because we used this tactic to run them out of 0.0 space.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 20:40:00 -
[32]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Originally by: Goumindong
Tell that to Rise...
oh wait, you can't because we used this tactic to run them out of 0.0 space.
Lol if it works against any alliance they do not deserve the title or to be in 0.0.
Are BOB gonna be moving to jita in the near future cos of your afk cloakers?.
I don't think so.
Only because of the strength of tech 2 BPOs. But if we can keep their moons down they will run out of money. Its already started to a point as they have attempted to shore up their alliance by grabbing who they can from others who don't have access to those resources.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 21:04:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Goumindong on 08/04/2008 21:04:27
they didn't move to empire, they dissolved and got absorbed by other alliances not quite so close to be assaulted. Also, note that i did not say they would move to empire, i said that they would do better in empire... But really...
http://www.eve-maps.com/outpostalert/alliancechart.asp?FilterType=Alliance&FilterBy=RISE
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 21:13:00 -
[34]
Please elucidate on how you can organize this mining op around a large gang of cloaking ships.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 21:33:00 -
[35]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 08/04/2008 21:31:17
Originally by: Goumindong
Please elucidate on how you can organize this mining op around a large gang of cloaking ships.
Figure it out for yourself its easy and obvious to anybody who does not need ccp to fight for them, cos im tired of talking to a liar who's arguments are those of a child.
If i get a ban for saying this, fine its worth it.
So again, no proof. And if its so easy, why could an alliance of 1000 not do it?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 21:37:00 -
[36]
No, proof that you can organize a mining op that can defend against said cloakers as you claim.
You can't make the cloakers leave, and mining with them in local is stupid, so what do you do?
Hell, i am willing to accept a thought experiment on the issue.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 22:31:00 -
[37]
So you are saying that all anyone has to do to stop production is park some folks AFK and stick cloaks on their ships?
That seems so balanced, that you can just go and disrupt enemy production without risk.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 22:47:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Goumindong on 08/04/2008 22:49:09
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
No your claiming that remember, im saying that ppl need to and can be be defended while they mine/rat, or evenShockedShocked move to another system and guard the gates.
Originally by: You, the last freaking post before the above quote
Why so you can fly a imaginary cloaked blob on top of my solo frig guard, if a blob is in local do not carebear how hard is that to understand?.
And if they are in all your systems?
Please, if its so easy, tell me how to defend a mining op without incurring unreasonable cost or losing ships to a bunch of cloaked ships.
Quote:
You idea favors the blob (what a surpriseRolling Eyes from a goon) as without cloaking small squads will not be able to be in systems outnumbered.
I don't want to get rid of cloaking, i want to get rid of cloaking without being at the keyboard. If you are at the keyboard its pretty much impossible for you to be caught if you are in a ship designed to cloak.
Edit: Also, have i not flat out said that we have abused this mechanic to its fullest? How in the world is arguing against a mechanic that we have and will continue to abuse an argument towards the interests of my alliance?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 23:10:00 -
[39]
Cost that pushes return under opportunity cost of producing in empire is unreasonable.
Why not just let us scan them down? Same effect except now you can kill ratters who cloak as soon as you enter local instead of not being able to.
Rise was pretty useless, but i can't really say they were any more useless than tri.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 23:30:00 -
[40]
20m/acct/hour is fairly easily achieved in empire[not even including LP rewards] You would need everyone in your gang pulling down 40m/acct/hour to defend them.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
|
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.08 23:59:00 -
[41]
Per person, not per account. 20m/hour is at the top end of possible in empire in the same config as what you would be running in 0.0 iirc[and mineral prices havent gone down at more]
But you are not constrained to mining which is why i said "not including LP", because 20m/hour is fairly easy for mission running.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 00:20:00 -
[42]
You don't need a rorq, you just need any command ship.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 00:32:00 -
[43]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Originally by: Goumindong
You don't need a rorq, you just need any command ship.
Its about profit bud remember and a rorq cannot be used in empire.
Yes, and the difference between the rorq and the cs is not very significant.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 04:33:00 -
[44]
You're dodging his question.
http://eve-files.com/dl/154147
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url] |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 14:22:00 -
[45]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Here was my answer
No, that was you telling him that he and all alliances suck. That was not telling him what you would do if it happened.
And no, you can't keep miners alive with logistics, they will be volleyed before the cycle time resets on your shield boosters[via target switching]
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 18:30:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Goumindong on 09/04/2008 18:31:03
Its not the DPS you have to worry about, its changing targets. But no, it wouldn't. 20 6 month old alts can be doing around 400 DPS apiece in cruiser sized ships [and ewaring you right back], so you're looking at ~8000 DPS +/- ewar.
ed: "I put a logistics in the belt" is not an answer. Its like saying "oh i just defend them"
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 18:45:00 -
[47]
How do you keep your ships in range of the roids and cans?
Aligning is a great tactic ratting in a raven, not so much for mining
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 00:19:00 -
[48]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 09/04/2008 22:28:51
If another alliance is looking to kill yours this is what happens in 0.0 pal, now if you want me to tell you how to make as much isk in a 0.0 warzone as you can in a stable non warzone 0.0 system then il honestly say i cannot, but i have not tried too, ive just told you how alliances have dealt with it in the past.
But that is 0.0 for you if your at war buddy, everybody has had to deal with cloakers in the past either by doing fully organized alliance mining ops or by spending isk on other assets that generate isk like moons or BPO's.
Welcome to 0.0 great ain't it now stop crying and deal with it, or go back to empire.
What is the difference between a 0.0 war-zone and a non war-zone 0.0 system?
We want you to tell us how you can make more money in a 0.0 "war-zone" than you can in a stable empire location.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 00:53:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Goumindong on 10/04/2008 00:53:56
Who are you killing and where? Also play time.
ed: and as usual, no proof or explanation.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 01:04:00 -
[50]
So who are you then? Otherwise why should i believe you are not lying?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 01:12:00 -
[51]
Yea, so i'm going to go with "you can't" because you wont show us how easy it is, and "you are a liar" because you wont let us know who you are.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 01:40:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Yohanes Flame
45 minutes cycle time on cloak with a 20 second cool down. problem minimized?
downsides please respond.
You couldn't use cloaks to ambush people, turning them off fast is essential to that operation. If you can turn them off fast, nothing changes.
I consider that an integral part of cloaking.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 15:12:00 -
[53]
Originally by: HEY LISTEN
Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 10/04/2008 10:56:55
Originally by: Goumindong
Yea, so i'm going to go with "you can't" because you wont show us how easy it is, and "you are a liar" because you wont let us know who you are.
Theres a shocker.
Anyway back on topic, cloaks are fine as they are and if an alliance's space is under attack then it should not be safe to carebear at will with no risk in fact it should be very hard or impossable.
In normal RL war's you have commando's, sleeper agents, partisans, insurgents and other types of hidden saboteurs and units that hurt the enemies supply lines or economy/manufacturing endeavors.
This sort of thing has been going on in wars and in eve for a long time but it seems the influx of carebear types from empire into 0.0 has got them all hot and bothered and crying to ccp about the harsh reality of making isk in 0.0.
Suck it up or go back to empire.
The answer to "There is not enough risk in belt based production activities in 0.0" is not "So i should be invulnerable whenever i damn well please and should have no risk in space", its "increase the risk in belt based production activities.
Even if you were to make a real world comparison to a space ship game and not to just develop a model for understanding human actions in that game you would still come to the conclusion that in real wars commando's, sleeper agents, partisans, insurgents, and other types of hidden saboteurs are the most risky of all operations because you can be found and then executed.
Yet there is no "find and execute" ability. There is not even a "find and fight" ability, there isn't a "find" ability. You can't hunt them down. There is no critical mass where it becomes easier to find them the more they proliferate[in fact, the more they proliferate, the harder it is to deal with them.]
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 21:25:00 -
[54]
Originally by: stinger7
When the guys who fight behind the lines attack is when you get to kill them and eve is the same, i doubt very much that in past wars ppl left important assets and other things unguarded and eve wars are the same. Im not going to quote examples from history but resistance fighters have always been hidden until the attack just as the defenders have always known they were there but been unable to do anything about it but guard the installations and production areas against the sneak attacks.
Even if this were a valid analogy[which its not, because eve is a game and not a job or actual war], it would still fail because its simply not true that the only time to catch saboteurs, insurgents, and other types of behind the lines warfare is when they attack. Its very very very not true. These are the riskiest types of attack with the highest failure rates before and after the operations.
In eve, these are the least risky types of attack with the lowest failure rates before, during, after the operations.
Quote:
theres plenty of ways to make isk in eve that do not involve sitting in a belt in 0.0.
Why should sitting in a belt in 0.0 not be a possible profitable endeavor?
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 04:41:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Goumindong
These are the riskiest types of attack with the highest failure rates before and after the operations.
In eve, these are the least risky types of attack with the lowest failure rates before, during, after the operations.
Where are you getting this from? Insurgency operations often have a very very high success rate - typically disproptionate to the forces employed. If this was not the case you'd see virtually no Special Forces or insurgency campaigns being used: however these are becoming the predominant aspect of modern assymetric warfare.
C.
Sorry, you're wrong. Insurgency as currently employed is a tactic of necessity, not utility. [See: Everything ever written about these tactics, ever]
People are insurgents because they can't fight the main forces, not because it makes you more successful at it. As well because they are part of the population which is under occupation. E.G. In Iraq, coalition forces have roughly a 6 to 1 kill ratio against insurgent forces[at best guess, or the roughly 5/1 kill or wounded ratio for U.S. soldiers in Veitnam, while the Green Berets had a quite high casualty rate in that conflict, U.S. special forces deployments in Panama also had very high casualty rates]
It works because the source of the insurgency is a population that is not intended to be killed but be made docile.
There is no such thing as occupation in eve. Pod pilots are not citizens. No one wants to subjugate a population into docile tax producing pets.
There is no analogy here there is only a discrepancy in the amount of risk that pilots with cloaks must take and the amount of damage they are able to do.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 05:22:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Matrixcvd
i honestly dont mind probing afk cloakers, but with macro how can you tell? if you dont move in 5 minutes you get decloaked? macro would just do it fine, so even tho i think going afk just to be a ***** is lame, probably nothing you can do for it
Well, using macros is against the TOS, so if you have someone in space for 23 hours without logging sitting at a POS or in a station you could probably make a rational inference.
Not saying that you should petition people that do that, just saying that the possibility of people cheating is not a real good reason to not implement something that will have a positive effect for the game assuming not everyone does cheat. Unless that "cheat" is a game mechanic[bookmarks and show info being a prime example], but that is an entire other issue altogether.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 03:02:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Cailais
In short Im refering to the Local Chat channel, Probes and the Scanner.
The weakest of these in implementation terms is the scanner. Its UI is terrible and it just feels 'clunky'. Improve the mechanism for scanning and you could have degrees of cloaking from 'stealthy' (not invisible but hard to 'see' to full on 'cloaked'.
The problem with changing stuff like this is that its just
1. Not necessary
2. Much too complicated than it needs to be.
Fixing the UI in scanning is admirable, but for the purposes of cloaks, local, and other things relating to information the method in which it comes in is not all that important[and can backfire due to its supreme importance]
I mean there is literally a combination of three things that you can do to swiftly and easily fix all of these problems[Unfortunately one isn't swift because it doesn't use any known existing mechanisms]
1. Add a 5 minute log off timer for mining or ratting.[I.E. add NPC aggression for rocks and add a 4-5 minute log off timer onto it]: Anyone logging off that hasn't engaged in production has nothing to worry about, they are still on the 2 minute timer. Anyone logging off to avoid enemies will have to take the risks, and anyone not logging off to avoid enemies is probably >5 minutes away from enemies with scan probes. Anyone going to a POS or station is still safe until you decide to siege those assets.
2. Let ships scan cloaked ships with current probes and no other mechanics. Non cloaking ships with cloaks can be scanned down and killed with a bit of luck[finding them in the system without the directional scanner]. Cloaking ships without cov-ops cloaks are possible to find and kill, but very difficult since there is no real way to decloak them without them knowing, and anyone at their keyboard should be able to leave[they will have to decloak for that, but its better than dying]. Cloaking ships with cov-ops cloaks will pretty much only die if they go AFK when cloaked.
Cloaked ships can still safe and wait out their aggression timers to log if necessary.
3. Change local to 30 second delay and/or not display anyone in local who has not decloaked from a gate jump. Now you can't know if someone is in system before they do, and they have a bit of a head start on finding you before you have a chance to react if you haven't set a scout, and you can't make a snap decision to leave since you won't know how many have come in until at least one is on grid and initiating action.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
|
|
| |
|