| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Po3tank
Amarr
Evil ALT Corp
Talon Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.04.21 01:55:00 -
[1]
why cant a probe find a cloaked ship it makes no since.. 
this thread makes no since eather 
|
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:12:00 -
[2]
The cloak generates distortion around the ship that no current probe technology can lock on to.
|
Reem Fairchild
Minmatar
Shadow Forces Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:48:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Po3tank
why cant a probe find a cloaked ship it makes no since..
Maybe it's because it's cloaked? 
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:55:00 -
[4]
Wooot another old argument revived.
afk cloakers are annoying as all hell, but they've yet to think of a way to fix it.
------------
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
It's great being a puppetmaster
|
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:57:00 -
[5]
Cloaking doesn't need fixing. It's the only way to safely afk in systems without stations.
I would however support a probe that can scan a cloaked ship to within 5km accuracy... but which only has a scanning range of 150-200km. |
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 03:03:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
Cloaking doesn't need fixing. It's the only way to safely afk in systems without stations.
I would however support a probe that can scan a cloaked ship to within 5km accuracy... but which only has a scanning range of 150-200km.
Up that to a 20km accuracy... since if you warp a gang of 4 ships with 5 drones each to a result inside 5km the cloaker would be screeeeewed 
Heck... or even 1 cov-ops with fighters assigned (since most fighters orbit at about 5km or more) |
Dr Slaughter
Rabies Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 10:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: techzer0
Wooot another old argument revived.
afk cloakers are annoying as all hell, but they've yet to think of a way to fix it.
Give cloaks;
1. cool down time (before they can be re-activated) = to 10% of their last activity period. Reset by gate, cyno or jump bridge usage.
2. maximum activity period based on cloaking skill.
as an example... say cloaking V gives you an 60 minutes of cloak before it comes down. I then have to wait 6 minutes before I can re-cloak. So at about 50 minutes I start to have to think about getting out of the system, or hoping no one will have probes ready.
dealing with the UNDERPANTS of eve since 2004 |
Jim Pooley
Seven.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 10:37:00 -
[8]
Maybe only the Covert Op cloaks should have the immunity to cloaking, and the combat ships with cloaks fitted can be probed out, all be it only with great skills by the prober.
------------------------------------------
Mines a Pint of Large
|
Barzam
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 10:39:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jim Pooley
Maybe only the Covert Op cloaks should have the immunity to cloaking, and the combat ships with cloaks fitted can be probed out, all be it only with great skills by the prober.
This.
|
Everyone Dies
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 10:55:00 -
[10]
if you are afk why the **** are you even logged in? you are just wasting electricity and bandwidth
|
Everyone Dies
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 10:57:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jim Pooley
Maybe only the Covert Op cloaks should have the immunity to cloaking, and the combat ships with cloaks fitted can be probed out, all be it only with great skills by the prober.
why should covert ops cloak have complete immunity too? there's nothing saying it would be game breaking to have a chance to probe a covert ops out. why should anyone be immune in this game from pvp?
|
RuleoftheBone
Minmatar
Veto.
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 11:00:00 -
[12]
I tend to prefer BBQ sauce on chicken.
"Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way"
General George Patton USA
|
Jovoich
Towers Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 11:06:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Everyone Dies
Originally by: Jim Pooley
Maybe only the Covert Op cloaks should have the immunity to cloaking, and the combat ships with cloaks fitted can be probed out, all be it only with great skills by the prober.
why should covert ops cloak have complete immunity too? there's nothing saying it would be game breaking to have a chance to probe a covert ops out. why should anyone be immune in this game from pvp?
Coz its a COVERT OPS? Designed with the solo purpose of not been found.
|
Aewaytor
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 11:17:00 -
[14]
Cov-ops cloaks on cov-ops and recons: leave alone
Normal cloaks on normal ships: Cloaks use Cap. How much? I'd base it on the Microwarp drive penalties and usage. Can base it on cloaking skill (5% less cap per level for example).
[MORTS] |
ViolenTUK
Gallente
Vindicated Exiles
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 11:27:00 -
[15]
Cloaking devices are nerfed enough and dont need to be nerfed any further. Please leave cloaking devices alone.
www.eve-players.com |
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:28:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Dr Slaughter
Edited by: Dr Slaughter on 21/04/2008 10:49:51
Originally by: techzer0
Wooot another old argument revived.
afk cloakers are annoying as all hell, but they've yet to think of a way to fix it.
Give cloaks;
1. cool down time (before they can be re-activated) = to 10% of the last activity period. Reset by gate, cyno or jump bridge usage.
2. maximum activity period based on cloaking skill.
as an example... say cloaking V gives you an 60 minutes of cloak before it comes down. I then have to wait 6 minutes before I can re-cloak. So at about 50 minutes I start to have to think about getting out of the system, or hoping no one will have probes ready.
*edit*
Maximum activity period and cool down time is also dependent on the type of cloak being used. So CovOps cloaks can be active longer and have a shorter cool down time. etc. etc.
This is as maximum a nerf to cloaks as I'd support. I'd also support further reductions in targeting speed, and even targeting range with a fitted cloak.
Covert Ops cloaks don't need nerfing though.
But if cloakers can be probed out anywhere as if they didn't have a cloak fitted, just remove the module from the game and don't even tease us with it. I mean really.
|
Elysa Madou
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:34:00 -
[17]
Stealth Bombers would be screwed utterly by all of these proposals.
Not only force recon/covops need to use a cloak. If a bomber can't cloak, it's going to melt. Maybe if it got another specific bonus but...
You're already losing half your scan resolution to cloak a combat ship. You're also losing most of your speed to cloak, and you have a long wait once you uncloak before you can target anyone.
AFK cloakers are more of a nuisance than anything. Then again, no modules should be effective afk modules. Why not just deactivate all modules if no action has been taken in the past hour? (IE, the user hasn't typed anything, clicked anywhere, or even moved the mouse. No input for an hour = afk mode, it automatically deactivates modules and logs you out.)
|
Gimpb
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 18:11:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Jovoich
Originally by: Everyone Dies
Originally by: Jim Pooley
Maybe only the Covert Op cloaks should have the immunity to cloaking, and the combat ships with cloaks fitted can be probed out, all be it only with great skills by the prober.
why should covert ops cloak have complete immunity too? there's nothing saying it would be game breaking to have a chance to probe a covert ops out. why should anyone be immune in this game from pvp?
Coz its a COVERT OPS? Designed with the solo purpose of not been found.
As long as you're not afk you still wouldn't get caught, you'd just have to put some concentration into avoiding them.
It's as simple as:
1. Be moving so they don't decloak you on warp in.
2. When someone shows up nearby, go somewhere else.
|
Talon Aidian
Skill Level Six
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 18:44:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Talon Aidian on 21/04/2008 18:44:23
Actually, according to what I have seen from the dev blogs and board messages, this is already being addressed. In essence, the devs are working on changing how cloaking works in the game for ships not specifically designed for it (CovOps, Recon, and Black Ops).
I believe there will be ways to probe out non CovOps cloaks in the future, but the problem is that the ships that are designed around the cloak would be either rendered almost useless by a cloak nerf, or be required to be upgraded to the point that they could fight non-cloak dependant ships on even terms when uncloaked. Either option would both alter the place of these ships in the game and unbalance them.
For now, I'm willing to see where it goes from here, but don't see any real problem with cloaks on ships designed for them.
|
TZeer
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 18:48:00 -
[20]
LOL @ anticloaking crybabies
Anyway, CCP have said they know about the cloaking issues.
But, they are not going to do anything with it until they fix the way people use local as an inteltool.
In the latest live devblog they touched the subject, but they also said that local,cloaking, scanning and so on will be done in one complete package.
Things that where mentioned:
- A quick peek in local like now, will not give you the intel you get today. They are discussing how to do it and one of the options is make it show only numbers in local, and your face will only appear if you
say something. On the other side they will give you tools and skills to compensate a little.
- Non spec ships will be probable. Would take some effort, but probable. Specced ships like covert ops, force recons, stealth bombers, black ops and so on would be extremly hard/close to impossible to scan down.
|
caladron prime
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 19:08:00 -
[21]
this from a cloaker:
as stated above, make covops, recon, and blackops nigh on impossible/impossible to sniff out.
For ships that are not spec'd, give each type a 'radiation cost', ie a photonic or infrared signature value. Then make skills trainable to use probes/modules that would allow you to sniff out these types of signatures. the ease of discovery would be proportional to the skills that one has trained and the signature cost of the ship. ie, something like a rifter might have a much smaller photonic/infrared signature than, say, a mammoth, and thus the rifter might be tougher to pinpoint than a hauler.
Possibly, have the signature value also dependent on the modules loaded and online, like say ewar and active tank modules. Activated modules would increase a signature. This would have the effect of forcing a decision when cloaking-keep everything online, and risk getting probed out, or offlining modules, and possibly having to either dock or wait for cap in order to re-online.
Originally by: CCP Navigator
That long?
I would have nerfed it before it was created
|
Po3tank
Amarr
Evil ALT Corp
Talon Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 23:11:00 -
[22]
BUMP
i just want afk cloakers to fear somthing for once
and i do like the idea of people in local bieng hidden would add one hell off a expearnce to EVE
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |