| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Marcus Gideon
Gallente
Excessive Force
   |
Posted - 2008.08.12 00:02:00 -
[61]
AFK / Cloaks
---
Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word.
"Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST" |
Sylthi
Minmatar
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 04:51:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Sylthi on 12/08/2008 04:55:23
Can't support this. Cloaks are weak enough (read: limited enough in useful application) as is. Leave them be.
The REAL solution to this would be for CCP to actually start enforcing their own rules and get rid of a lot of these isk selling farmers.
No support.
*
* |
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 04:57:00 -
[63]
I read through this thread. Got a different suggestion:
Bigger ship = longer time for cloak to take effect on ship e.g. for a raven, it would take what, 20 seconds to full cloak? That's enough time to find them if they haven't ss'd.
Furthermore, I should point out that using a cloak to save your behind from a roaming gang is a perfectly legitimate way to do so. Otherwise, it would just be a matter of time till the probes got to you :P
San Matari Official forums |
Pherusa Plumosa
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 05:41:00 -
[64]
I don't mind Covert Ops Cloaking devices, they are just fine how they are. (Recons, Cov Ops, Blackops, maybe stealth bombers) If someone trained up for Cov Ops, he can sit on a Safe Spot afk as long has he wants.
But T1 Cloaking Ratters, afk cloakers and similar folks are just lame. 100% security for nearly no penalty (locktime? Who cares...)
Making them scannable with ship probes (30 seconds) is a bit to much imho. What about giving them simililar signatur radiuses like plexes. So you would have to get your quest probe launcher and several different probes to pin them down?
__________________________________________________
|
Taradis
Amarr
The Imperial Assassins
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 08:31:00 -
[65]
Their's nothing wrong with cloaks leave them the hell alone to many things are going to shit anyway because of whiners like u  u don't like it
ADAPT OR QUIT!
|
Kenpachi Viktor
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 02:43:00 -
[66]
I stands to reason that a larger ship is harder to cloak than a smaller one, but the current non cov-ops cloaks use a smallish fixed amount of CPU.
If there was also a percentage of total cpu used, it would make them harder to fit, with out disadvantaging smaller ships.
The balancing team would have to do the exact calculations, but between 2.5% and 10% cpu reduction for having a cloak fitted is what I think is sensible.
If local gets a nerf, then so should non cov-ops cloaks.
|
night shiftstar
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 02:56:00 -
[67]
Cloak is nerffed as it is enough over pvp issues.
If u say Durability for cloaking after a few hrs activity, then ok.
|
Lya SOS
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 18:33:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Lya SOS on 02/11/2008 18:33:03
 Originally by: Ishina Fel
Cloaking devices have way too little requirements and are way too powerful. Why can a frigate sized module cloak a Titan?
Thumbs up for changes.
can ships with cloaks cloak other ships ?
|
Ris Dnalor
Minmatar
Ex Cruoris Libertas
|
Posted - 2008.11.09 07:33:00 -
[69]
aye this should be fixed... when cloaked you should not be able to broadcast (chat) in LOCAL without giving away your position....
have enabled cloak disable local chat ;)
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.11.09 11:29:00 -
[70]
introduce new panelty:
- 50% optimal
- 50% fall off
- 50% misile flight time
- 50% misile velocity
- 200% missile/turet signature radious
- 50% misile explo velocity
stealth bomebrs/black ops get gonus to remove that panelties, ratters fixed ;]
Quote:
It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
|
|
|
Kenpachi Viktor
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 04:08:00 -
[71]
A Way To Detect Cloaked Ships Without Destroying Cloaking Completely
|
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 11:32:00 -
[72]
Recently I thought of a different suggestion, which I wrote up elsewhere. Basically:
- Give standard cloaks cap usage
- Give stealthbombers bonuses to avoid this
- The cap usage is proportion to the ship's sig radius
- Cap recharge stops when you cloak
|
Burn Mac
Minmatar
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 13:56:00 -
[73]
I disagree the problem isnt people cloaking its people being able to check local all the time, remove local and this whouldnt be a problem as a pilgrim whould ruin that raven pilots day.
|
Junmar
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 14:06:00 -
[74]
I dont support this idea, but perhaps some sort of cloaking sensor array could be developed for POS's that would give a general idea of where a cloaked ship might be in a system (like around the moon of the 7th planet). Something that allows people to find the AFK player, but doesnt make it easy.
MY idea: if you are online but afk, you should have some risk just as if you are sleeping in a park in NYC with money hanging out of your pocket. 
|
I SoStoned
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 19:21:00 -
[75]
Same old, same old.
Cov-Ops cloak = completely cloaked.
Improved T2 = Sig-res reduced to 0.5%. Ship is not *VISIBLY* removed from space. If you're close enough to see it you can move toward it (bear in mind that a BS is difficult to see at 40km), but it's not on your overview until 'decloaked'.
Standard T1 = Sigres reduced to 0.5 - 10% (dependant upon meta level), ship not visibly removed from space, only overview.
Ships designed for stealth (Bombers, Cov-Ops, Recons, Black ops, Blockade runners) would always be fully cloaked regardless.
|
yani dumyat
|
Posted - 2008.12.10 13:21:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
having the 15-minute aggro timer apply to 0.0 ratting to prevent farmers using ctrl-q instead.
^^ this
Had some farmers recently operating out of a cloaked carrier in a deep safe spot and despite a number of efforts they are virtually impossible to catch  I'm all for a bit of ninja ratting or plexing but for a group to be able to do this every day in the depths of enemy space with near 100% invulnerability is kinda wrong.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
If in doubt then all is good
If not in doubt then ask yourself harder questions |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
|
Posted - 2008.12.10 15:43:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Alekseyev Karrde on 10/12/2008 15:43:00
rat aggro w/o fixing cloaking means everyone will use the cloak if they already arnt, not a v good idea. All the "cloaking's already nerfed arguments" are sort of silly considering most of the draw backs they are mentioning only come into play once you're COMPLETLY INVULNERABLE.
Problems I see:
1. Cloaks are one size fits all, what cloaks my stealthbomber can cloak Shrike's titan
2. Cloaking drawbacks on standard ships have detrimental effects to PVP but which do not translate to fighting NPCs.
3. Non spec ops ships (cov ops, black ops, recons, etc. simply by saying anything that can use a black ops jump portal) can cloak indefinatly, from downtime to downtime if they wanted to.
Solutions that seem obvious:
1. Make ship-class sized cloaks.
2. Change the scan resolution delay to a ROF penalty.
3. As Scagga mentioned, add a slight cap drain to cloaks and disable cap regen for cloaked ships.
And while not directly related, getting rid of local and bacon cant hurt.
---
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.12.10 17:06:00 -
[78]
NO
OP Should be shot/banned for using BACON
OP Should go back to WoW if he want's to play an easier game.
Epic Fail.
Learn to play the game and tackle and stop being a crybaby.
bloody exploiters
|
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.12.10 17:13:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 10/12/2008 17:13:45
This:
"I disagree the problem isnt people cloaking its people being able to check local all the time, remove local and this whouldnt be a problem as a pilgrim whould ruin that raven pilots day."
Nerfing cloak at the current state of power-block 0.0 reality would be plain wrong.
Cloaked carriers operating inside deep 0.0 ? Very good. It just shows us clearly that no other
existence in 0.0 is possible. Either you have a 100 cap blob or you use cloaks to rat, do guerilla etc.
"Ratting raven, in our own space, alerted by BACON warps to safe, cloaks and smacks on local. "
HUN I know you can do better than making an issue of farming ravens. They are no real PvPer so why you bothering about them ? It sounds more like a desperate wish to grief a nullity.
|
Ackuula
|
Posted - 2008.12.11 18:43:00 -
[80]
NO to any cloaking nerf till they give me someplace else to hide other than a station.
This game just absolutlely screams for LO (Low Observability)
There should be dozens if not hundreds of places to hide in any system that can't be probed out (except by shear luck) and would require some effort with the good o'l Mark 1 eyeball scanner. Once they add those in the game then we can start talking about putting some heavy restrictions on cloaks.
It is more than over due as an option in the game.
Examples of LO
Hiding in massive asteroid belts (think 10-20x times the size of the current ice belts) or near wrecks, not scanable due to clutter
Close orbits to stars where background noise drowns out sginals.
Gas clouds that reduce grid so that visibility on the overview is measured in tens of kilometers not hundreds.
Powerdown modes that reduce signitures to near zero.
Passive and active scanning modes.
Local be corp/alliance intel based rather than 100% ICU based.
Anchorable probes to provide intel to above LOCAL, but can be passive/active as well as discovered and destroyed. Different kinds should last on par with standards cans and/or anchorable kinds, that may or may not need fuel.
Nerfing cloaks without adding some element to replace it is just catering to the carebears that can't be bothered to properly defend their little piece of 0.0
|
|
|
Finawin
|
Posted - 2008.12.11 22:37:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Finawin on 11/12/2008 22:37:09
I see lots of babies throwing fits because a single person is in their system they're too noob to hunt down.
The problem isn't with cloaking, seeing as you take a huge hit on having one installed, it's with you.
|
attitude man
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.11 23:49:00 -
[82]
if they bring the nano back, who care about cloak ****t
|
Jon Malkovich
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 02:42:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Tusko Hopkins
Ratting raven, in our own space, alerted by BACON warps to safe, cloaks and smacks on local. Stays for weeks. This should go. Regular, non covert-ops cloaking devices should be nerfed to either work less reliably, be probeable somehow or give more penalties than what they are giving today.
how did this idiot get elected CSM?
|
Mikhale Romanov
Black Hats Delta
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 07:26:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Tusko Hopkins
Ratting raven, in our own space, alerted by BACON warps to safe, cloaks and smacks on local. Stays for weeks. This should go. Regular, non covert-ops cloaking devices should be nerfed to either work less reliably, be probeable somehow or give more penalties than what they are giving today.
So.. you would make the Blackops ships even worse? Did you think when you posted? I thought the CSM members would make a bit more sense when they proposed ideas. Please ruin my Blackops more!!
ZOMG Communism! |
Solomon XI
Hoist The Colors.
Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 11:11:00 -
[85]
Cloaking is fine. I am not going to support this.
|
Synthia Sin
Amarr
Lilith Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 12:17:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Tusko Hopkins
Ratting raven, in our own space, alerted by BACON warps to safe, cloaks and smacks on local. Stays for weeks. This should go. Regular, non covert-ops cloaking devices should be nerfed to either work less reliably, be probeable somehow or give more penalties than what they are giving today.
If it's YOUR space, why aren't you THERE?
If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution.Emma Goldman |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:06:00 -
[87]
Nerf afk cloakers and cloak ratters.
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:09:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Synthia Sin
If it's YOUR space, why aren't you THERE?
He is there , the point is that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to do anything other than staying in local against a cloak user.
Or if there is then pls write down ,how could you kill a cloak farmer which warps to safespot asap you enter system and cloaks.
|
sir gankalot
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:32:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Naomi Knight
Originally by: Synthia Sin
If it's YOUR space, why aren't you THERE?
He is there , the point is that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to do anything other than staying in local against a cloak user.
Or if there is then pls write down ,how could you kill a cloak farmer which warps to safespot asap you enter system and cloaks.
OMFG!11! We cannot lock down an entire solar system!1!1 The game is unbalanced!1!1
If someone takes the risk of coming into your space and manages to kill your rats more power to him. If you don't want him to hunt rats in your space you must make sure you kill them first. Boring to guard belts? Hell yeah, but that's the price you pay for wanting to get the bugger.
This sounds to me like a bunch of whiners whining over something quite insignificant....
|
Janu Hull
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:29:00 -
[90]
No vote here. I rely on cloaks to move my capital ship. Find a nice quiet system, pop the cyno, warp the carrier around to a mid point safe, either pre-set or set up on the fly, then wait for the cyno ship to get to the next system.
There are more applications of cloaking affected than simply cuckholded PvPers screaming for farmer kills. I think this has more to do with a ganker's sense of entitlement than any flaw in the module itself.
I've been saved by cloaks, and I've been burned by cloakers. I wouldn't trade either experience for a whining ganker's appeasement.
In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |