EVE Search - Cloaking should have a manual cycle or be cap intensive

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

Cloaking should have a manual cycle or be cap intensive

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 30	Posted - 2012.02.28 19:44:00 - [1] - Quote I'm sorry but seeing afk cloakers in every system whose job is to just scare miners is stupid. Even when we set these guys up and kill them we come back to find more afk cloakers who occasionally decloak to shoot some torps at cans people have mined. These guys go hours on end afk cloaking. Therefore I think it's best that cloaking either requires cap or requires you be active in order to cycle an activation timer. Something needs to be done about this. The days of sitting non-chalantly afk cloaked for hours on end needs to stop. CCP at least make these people have to be active in order to maintain a cloak. Discuss!
Daneel Trevize The Scope Gallente Federation 74	Posted - 2012.02.28 19:50:00 - [2] - Quote Eve-O forums, 2012. Is this still being whined about?
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 30	Posted - 2012.02.28 19:54:00 - [3] - Quote Yes because it is a flawed mechanic.
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 127	Posted - 2012.02.28 19:55:00 - [4] - Quote Torothin wrote: Discuss! Remove Local Chat Intel!
mxzf Shovel Bros 797	Posted - 2012.02.28 19:55:00 - [5] - Quote First off, this belongs in the F&I forum. Second, it's already been done to death. Search before you post.
Andrea Griffin 137	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:00:00 - [6] - Quote When my 3 person mostly-highsec corporation was wardecced by a larger alliance with well over 100 people in it, the ability to cloak for long periods of time was one of the very few ways we had to conduct guerrilla warfare. It's an important mechanic for that very reason; it allows an outnumbered force to pick and choose the fights presented to them. Also, if you are annoyed with people uncloaking to shoot your cans then what can I say... Don't jet your ore. Derp. It's not you guys who need to repair what has been broken, it's us. CCP Wrangler
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 30	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:03:00 - [7] - Quote What about the people who cloak up in griffin alts with cloaks in every system. Is that a legit guerilla warfare tactic? You are able to guerilla warfare with cloaks if you are active. So derp right back to you noob.
Whiteknight03 Trilon Industries and Exploration 37	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:04:00 - [8] - Quote Lol you do realize a person who is afk can't hurt you, right? How about we just remove local, then you won't have to worry about whoever might be afk in "your" system.
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 30	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:05:00 - [9] - Quote I'm all for removing local. We all would lose way more ships and be ganked/get ganks way more. WH vets would have an insta advantage.
Salcon Cliff Aliastra Gallente Federation 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:08:00 - [10] - Quote This has been 'discussed' to death, do a quick forum search. And after spending a long time in w-space, I will whole-heartedly support some version of a reduced local intel. In conjunction with that, maybe removing the ability to d-scan and probe scan while cloaked.

Andrea Griffin 138	Posted - 2012.02.28 20:30:00 - [11] - Quote Torothin wrote: What about the people who cloak up in griffin alts with cloaks in every system. Is that a legit guerilla warfare tactic? You are able to guerilla warfare with cloaks if you are active. So derp right back to you noob. Actually yes, it is. Disruption of industry is a VERY valid tactic if you can't attack your aggressor on the PvP side of things. If all it takes is someone sitting in system with a cloak to disrupt their industry then so be it. If the industrialists are too derpy to move a few systems over where there's no cloakies, then that's up to them. Edit: And don't tell me that they're in EVERY system. Last night I did quite a bit of travel and I went through a lot of empty systems. It's not you guys who need to repair what has been broken, it's us. CCP Wrangler
Cephelange du'Krevviq Hephaestus LLC Get Off My Lawn 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:25:00 - [12] - Quote It's the analogous to a surface navy ship traversing waters where there's a known submarine threat. The location of the sub isn't known, so it's advisable for the transport/industrial ("non-combatant") vessel to be escorted by warships. If you feel "AFK cloakers" are a threat, find a different system to operate out of/in.
Lady Spank Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1593	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:38:00 - [13] - Quote How is it a problem? The problem is twofold. 1. Unwillingness to make an effort to defend ones space. 2. Cowardice permitting an AFK 'presence' to disrupt ones activity or ability to move one system over. Discuss. (a¦á_a¦â) ~ http://getoutnastyface.blogspot.com/ ~ (a¦á_a¦â)
Cephelange du'Krevviq Hephaestus LLC Get Off My Lawn 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:41:00 - [14] - Quote Torothin wrote: I'm sorry Now to be an asshat - your post could really have stopped after this. We know you're sorry, now apologize.
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:53:00 - [15] - Quote Cephelange du'Krevviq wrote: It's the analogous to a surface navy ship traversing waters where there's a known submarine threat. The location of the sub isn't known, so it's advisable for the transport/industrial ("non-combatant") vessel to be escorted by warships. If you feel "AFK cloakers" are a threat, find a different system to operate out of/in. Submarines do not go unmanned where nobody is controlling it thus making this point a bad example. AFK cloakers is a flawed ingame mechanic and should be removed.
Cephelange du'Krevviq Hephaestus LLC Get Off My Lawn 35	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:55:00 - [16] - Quote Torothin wrote: Cephelange du'Krevviq wrote: It's the analogous to a surface navy ship traversing waters where there's a known submarine threat. The location of the sub isn't known, so it's advisable for the transport/industrial ("non-combatant") vessel to be escorted by warships. If you feel "AFK cloakers" are a threat, find a different system to operate out of/in. Submarines do not go unmanned where nobody is controlling it thus making this point a bad example. AFK cloakers is a flawed ingame mechanic and should be removed. So should people that think they shouldn't have to put forth any effort to watch out for their own ass.
Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 21:57:00 - [17] - Quote I am not talking about pvp here. I'm talking about afk cloakers. I have no problem if the cloakers decide to engage. There is a difference. Again, this is a flawed mechanic and as of yet nobody has justified as to why a cycle cloak should not be introduced. If you are going to disrupt industry as pointed on then you must disrupt industry while being present at your computer.
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 128	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:13:00 - [18] - Quote Torothin the flawed mechanic is Local Chat Intel, without which the whole AFK cloaker "issue" vanishes. You said earlier you were in favor of removing Local, so why not make a new thread about that instead of shaming yourself further by extending the life of this one with further posts about how AFK people bother you.
Cephelange du'Krevviq Hephaestus LLC Get Off My Lawn 35	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:14:00 - [19] - Quote Torothin wrote: I am not talking about pvp here. I'm talking about afk cloakers. I have no problem if the cloakers decide to engage. There is a difference. Again, this is a flawed mechanic and as of yet nobody has justified as to why a cycle cloak should not be introduced. If you are going to disrupt industry as pointed on then you must disrupt industry while being present at your computer. You have yet to justify any changes to the mechanic. Regardless of what you intend, your post(s) are coming across as someone that wants to know if it's "safe" to mine or not. You don't seem to like the uncertainty that a possible AFK cloaker presents.
Lady Spank Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1595	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:17:00 - [20] - Quote Is there an 'afk cloaker' present? A: No... go mine and look at local B: Yes ... go next door and mine (a¦á_a¦â) ~ http://getoutnastyface.blogspot.com/ ~ (a¦á_a¦â)

Torothin Paragon. Elite Space Guild 33	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:22:00 - [21] - Quote Oh I don't mine. But if you are going to disrupt industry(mining) then you should be present at the computer while doing it. Regardless of what my posts portrays I know I am not a care bear. All I am saying as this AFK cloaking thing is a flawed mechanic. if you had a 15 min activation cycle. Then it would solve more problems and make this game more interesting.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance 435	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:27:00 - [22] - Quote sigh OP... AFK cloaking was "born" because the instant you enter a system, you appear on local. Because you are now the ONLY non-blue person in local, the "natives" in that system will immediately dock/cloak/POS up until you leave or are destroyed. The only way to get around this is to cloak up in some random spot in the system... and sit... often for hours. In doing this a cloaker "devalues" local as an intel tool and effectively forces the "native" to alter tactics. How can you alter tactics? Easy. - Spare a high and mid slot on your ratting battleship for a heavy energy neutralizer and a long point... and make enough room in your drone bay for 5 Warrior IIs. Congrats, you are now immune to Stealth Bombers (or, can escape them at the very least). - Cloaky Recons got you down? Easy... they have a decloak timer of about 5 to 10 seconds where they cannot lock anything... add in actual locking time and you have a good 7 to 12 seconds where you can escape. If you stay aligned to something, you can warp off as soon as they appear on your overview. - Are your haulers being popped at gates/jumpbridges? Before you move something have a fast locking, high-alpha Tempest/Tornado meet up with you at the gate/jumpbridge. Ships that use the Cov-ops cloak are quite fragile compared to other ships in their class... and most are not fitted for buffer (btw... fitting your hauler completely with cargo expanders means that you migh have trouble withstanding ONE lousy bomb). - Move systems. - If you real fear is not the cloaker itself, but the hotdrop they can call in... opt to using smaller and/or "cheaper" ships that you can escape/replace more easily. For example: an Ishtar may not be able to clear out a sanctum the way a Marauder can... but it's MUCH cheaper and faster (and "small" to boot, which means that torps won't be as effective against it). edit: Now... getting back to the main subject. Your idea would have unintended consequences for people who live in wormholes and give the defender a greater advantage over the cloakers than they already have. Not supported. "Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 1039	Posted - 2012.02.28 22:53:00 - [23] - Quote Torothin wrote: All I am saying as this AFK cloaking thing is a flawed mechanic. if you had a 15 min activation cycle. Then it would solve more problems and make this game more interesting. I have spent several hours actively playing the game while under cloak. Your "fix" for a "flawed mechanic" would result in covert ops pilots being unable to scout and set up warp-to points because we'd be running the risk of being decloaked by an arbitrary 15 minute timer. AFK cloaking alts are kind of lame, but being intimidated by them is as well. Get some security and protect your space.
Cephelange du'Krevviq Hephaestus LLC Get Off My Lawn 35	Posted - 2012.02.28 23:05:00 - [24] - Quote FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Torothin wrote: All I am saying as this AFK cloaking thing is a flawed mechanic. if you had a 15 min activation cycle. Then it would solve more problems and make this game more interesting. AFK cloaking alts are kind of lame, but being intimidated by them is as well. Get some security and protect your space. I wonder if he realizes the irony of the alliance he's a member of in how it relates to his post.
Substantia Nigra NFI industrial Revival Of The Talocan Empire 554	Posted - 2012.02.28 23:07:00 - [25] - Quote I'm a bit confused here, perhaps there's a game dynamic out there that I'm not aware of. In my limited experience an AFK-cloaked player is no threat at all. Being AFK they can't hassle me, and being cloaked they can do squat beyond watching. I tend to worry more about hostile players who are actively working at their pooters and when they're uncloaked ... coz that seems to be when they start causing me grief. If the underlying issue is that your miners don't like to be abroad when there's a non-blue in system with unknown operational status (may be AFK, may not be AFK) then surely they could relocate and mine somewhere else ... I hear cloakies are not much of a problem in hisec, and my w-space mining efforts have never been terribly concerned about seeing cloakie non-blues in local. Otherwise, isn't that simply one of the joys of nullsec? Seems to me there's nothing here to fix ... xcept perhaps your miners. We can build and sell pretty much every ship. Check my bio for details. Our pirate epic arc completion packages really are very good: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=12973&find=unread
Sjugar Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 20	Posted - 2012.02.28 23:25:00 - [26] - Quote I don't like that people who are not behind their computer are playing the game. AFK cloaking is kinda similar to botting in that aspect, playing the game while not sitting behind your screen.
Substantia Nigra NFI industrial Revival Of The Talocan Empire 555	Posted - 2012.02.28 23:45:00 - [27] - Quote [ Sjugar wrote: I don't like that people who are not behind their computer are playing the game. Last night I was clearing some sleeper sites and it came time to head upstairs to deliver some goodnight kisses, tickles, and the like. I just directed my DPS to a long-time-to-kill sleeper, set a wide orbit, check scanned for no new incoming wormholes, and wandered upstairs. At the same time I had a hisec alt relocating a freighter to pickup a bundle of stuff I'd just hauled out of w-space. He was flying (very slowly) AFK. I came back to find that sleeper BS dead, the other sleepers still chasing my ship around in circles, no new incoming wormholes, and my freighter two jumps closer to his destination. Y'know I don't really care that you dislike people leaving their screens. It's gonna happen, it's gonna happen for short times, and it's gonna happen for long times. Surely you're not suggesting that I disband the fleet and logoff every toon everytime I want to take a pee, grab something to eat, or kiss the kids goodnight. Live with it! We can build and sell pretty much every ship. Check my bio for details. Our pirate epic arc completion packages really are very good: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=12973&find=unread
JohnSco Bunnie Slayers Redrum Fleet 0	Posted - 2012.02.29 00:39:00 - [28] - Quote I'm so tired of people whining, "Nerf this", or , "Nerf that". This subject is yet another example of something that should be countered instead of being nerfed. Historically, any development in weapons technology made the other guy come up with technology that nullified the new weapon. Then there was yet another advancement and yet another counter, and so on. This should be the case in Eve. If there is something that needs a counter, then suggest the remedy to CCP. Nerfing what already is, could apply to anything someone sees as 'unfair'. A simple counter might be a module that, when activated, sends out an energy pulse that causes all cloaked vessels, within maybe 35 or 40 km to become uncloaked for a short period of time. A sort of sonar, if you will, that can't be used near gates or stations without Concord intervention. Yes, some poor miner might be required to give up a slot on his already crowded ship, but if you want to talk the talk, then you'll have to walk the walk. I'm at work right now, and if this doesn't make much sense, then too bad because I'm busy
Jack Miton Lapse Of Sanity Exhale. 130	Posted - 2012.02.29 01:43:00 - [29] - Quote Miner tears!! OM NOM NOM NOM :D I fully support any and every tactic used to annoy miners. Cloaking is one of best working mechanics in EVE. Not being able to decloak a cloaky with a cloaked ship is terribly annoying but that's about it.
Tarsas Phage Pain Delivery. 42	Posted - 2012.02.29 03:00:00 - [30] - Quote Torothin wrote: Submarines do not go unmanned where nobody is controlling it thus making this point a bad example. AFK cloakers is a flawed ingame mechanic and should be removed. Almost every person is told when they're a child that if you're going out, have at least 1 friend with you. You know, the good old-fashioned Buddy System. In this case, that buddy can be a combat ship or two. If you want to solo mine in peace, go squirrel yourself away in some corner of derelik or kador because what you want to do and what you should do don't square up for 0.0 life. /T



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.