| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Matrix Skye
   |
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:35:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 13:35:03
 Originally by: Freya Runestone
He can attack something once. and his ship type+setup will be known. which makes it 3 times as hard to attack something a second time.
but if you want to spend 10 hours to build up to attack something. You could use that more wisely imho
How the **** is knowing his ship type and setup going to matter if he's just going to go cloak again for another 20 hours AFK? And all the while he naps or watches TV the rest of us take notes and hope he attacks while we're logged in? AGAIN, where's his risk during his 20-hour AFK cloak?
|
Ki An
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:59:00 -
[62]
Again, none of this would be a problem if you people wheren't so keen on metagaming by using local as an intel tool. Stop doing that and there won't be a problem. If you want to make it really fair, get behind the "remove local" line.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:07:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Ki An
Again, none of this would be a problem if you people wheren't so keen on metagaming by using local as an intel tool. Stop doing that and there won't be a problem. If you want to make it really fair, get behind the "remove local" line.
Yes, it's all about giving more safety to the aggressor  .
"reward for the aggressor"
"risk vs reward" for everyone else!
|
Sikozu Prioris
Suns Of Korhal
deadspace society
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:09:00 -
[64]
AFK cloakers are not a problem.
If you cant muster a defence to kill a single guy when he attacks you shouldnt be in 0.0.
If he is afk for 20 hours of the day he is not disrupting anything, as HE IS NOT DOING ANYTHING.
My god people grow some balls then come back. If cloaking is nerfed because of all the afk complainers then ccp have truely failed at life.
Lol |
Kolwrath
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:09:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Arlenna Molatov
Everyone in this game since day one has always used the phrase......
"THERE IS NO 100% SAFE AREA!!!"
Bzzz. Incorrect. Nobody says that. Not even CCP. There are these things called "Stations" you see. Well, apparently your 100% safe in those.
Nice try but you failed.
Originally by: Chaos Space Marines
Do you hear the voices, too?!?!
|
Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:10:00 -
[66]
I wish those who keep whining about cloaks simply leave the game and find some other MMO that will make them feel safe. There must be plenty of games that can deliver that needed sense of safety.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:15:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Sikozu Prioris
If he is afk for 20 hours of the day he is not disrupting anything, as HE IS NOT DOING ANYTHING.
Great, then you're not going to mind if CCP implements something to log them out.
|
Trojanman190
Altruism.
Malice.
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:17:00 -
[68]
Bacon and cloaking are soooo different... bacon abused an out of game resource and didn't just allow you to be afk, it gave you a 2-5 second warning you wouldn't normally have. You win about afk cloaking like there is nothing to do about. Maybe you should gtfo of your carebear alliance join one that has some pvpers... or better yet... learn to pvp yourself.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:18:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Ra Vhim
I wish those who keep whining about cloaks simply leave the game and find some other MMO that will make them feel safe. There must be plenty of games that can deliver that needed sense of safety.
You mean as safe as someone 'cloaked at a safe spot' safe?
Why would I want to do that if I can find that in this game already?
|
Ki An
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:22:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Yes, it's all about giving more safety to the aggressor .
"reward for the aggressor"
"risk vs reward" for everyone else!
Huh? You understand that the agressor wouldn't have access to local either, right? The agressor would have to look for targets, and those not currently agressors would have to scan for incoming hostiles. Note the "not currently agressors bit", as it seems that you are trying to divide the Eve community up into those that agress others (lesser worth) and those who only fight in defense (good guys). This, of course, is completely ********, as everyone that know how to play Eve know that sometimes you must be the agressor.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Zulu Six
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:26:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Yes, it's all about giving more safety to the aggressor .
"reward for the aggressor"
"risk vs reward" for everyone else!
Huh? You understand that the agressor wouldn't have access to local either, right? The agressor would have to look for targets, and those not currently agressors would have to scan for incoming hostiles. Note the "not currently agressors bit", as it seems that you are trying to divide the Eve community up into those that agress others (lesser worth) and those who only fight in defense (good guys). This, of course, is completely ********, as everyone that know how to play Eve know that sometimes you must be the agressor.
Shut up, Ki An mate, everybody knows PvPers are bad people. Anybody who is ignorant and immature enough to lock another player's ship and shoot first is a piece of crap in real life. You should just learn to mind your own business and let those poor guys mine and rat and run missions etc.
I am Havohej's alt. I would post with my main, but it's banned vOv |
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:30:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 14:41:52
Originally by: Ki An
Huh? You understand that the agressor wouldn't have access to local either, right? The agressor would have to look for targets, and those not currently agressors would have to scan for incoming hostiles. Note the "not currently agressors bit", as it seems that you are trying to divide the Eve community up into those that agress others (lesser worth) and those who only fight in defense (good guys). This, of course, is completely ********, as everyone that know how to play Eve know that sometimes you must be the agressor.
Now you know very dam well that the aggressor holds the court. If you're in hostile space then you SHOULD BE exposed to risk. With the cloak your risk goes down to 0% EVEN if you're AFK for hours in hostile space. Now what you want is to remove local so that not only is the AFK cloaker 100% safe but the defenders have to go another extra mile to find out (if it would even be possible under your suggestion) if there are hostiles in the system. So yes, you want more safety for intruders and more work/risk for the players holding sovereignty.
It doesn't surprise me really. What I'm getting at is you don't believe your own mantra. It's all bull****. What you want is make things difficult for your competitor while making it easier on yourself. And to top it off you spew crap like 'risk vs reward', 'nowhere's safe', 'blah blah'.
Edit: Response was to Ki An
|
Beltantis Torrence
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:32:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 12:20:01
Originally by: Ilvan
Being AFK cloaked in a safe spot is like being docked in a station: untouchable but at the same time unable to do anything.
Then what the **** is the point of having docking access denied in 0.0? Might as well be allowed to dock in hostile stations. You just don't get to shop or access the hangar. It's the same crap. And atleast in a station the locals know where you are  .
Edit 1: If you're in hostile space you should be at risk. But you're not as long as you're cloaked in SS and you can even go AFK indefinitely in HOSTILE SPACE. Your excuses are amusing.
Edit 2: So basically cloak is like a mini-hangar, a safety zone in which you are allowed to go watch your favorite TV show, take a shower, walk the dog, sleep, etc. It's amusing to read the "OMG NURF BACON CUZ YOU CAN PLAY AFK11!!!" thread and watch you defend your afk-win button in this thread, all while leaving the locals wondering whether you're at the keyboard or not. Some real funny ****.
Dude. You're scared of someone who isn't even at the keyboard. You fail. I personally don't even think local should name the people in the system unless they talk.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:32:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Zulu Six
Shut up, Ki An mate, everybody knows PvPers are bad people. Anybody who is ignorant and immature enough to lock another player's ship and shoot first is a piece of crap in real life. You should just learn to mind your own business and let those poor guys mine and rat and run missions etc.
Nice straw man there .
How's it working out for ya?
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:35:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Dude. You're scared of someone who isn't even at the keyboard. You fail. I personally don't even think local should name the people in the system unless they talk.
It's quite amusing to read so many posts defending AFK cloakers while at the same time spewing that space shouldn't be safe .
I love the eve forum hipocricies
|
Demitria Fernir
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:37:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Demitria Fernir on 09/06/2008 14:38:11
Make non-specialized Cloaking Devices use ship cap based on mass of the ship, just like warp drive does.
that will fix it, since if they can still cloak after that, they cannot be that terrifying
10100110010100101010011010100101001100101110101001
I will Conquer My Signature
Somewhere in the future
10100110010100101010011010100101001100101110101001 |
Ki An
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:40:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Now you know very dam well that the aggressor holds the court. If you're in hostile space then you SHOULD BE exposed to risk. With the cloak your risk goes down to 0% EVEN if you're AFK for hours in hostile space. Now what you want is to remove local so that not only is the AFK cloaker 100% safe but the defenders have to go another extra mile to find out (if it would even be possible under your suggestion) if there are hostiles in the system. So yes, you want more safety for intruders and more work/risk for the players holding sovereignty.
It doesn't surprise me really. What I'm getting at is you don't believe your own mantra. It's all bull****. What you want is make things difficult for your competitor while making it easier on yourself. And to top it off you spew crap like 'risk vs reward', 'nowhere's safe', 'blah blah'.
I don't think you're getting it, mate. The only reason for why cloakers - afk or not - give you chills is that you know they are there. In a way they aren't cloaked at all. The way it should be, imo, is that once you're cloaked, you disappear from local completely. Local shouldn't be used as an intel tool, as per Oveur's statements, and it's this usage of local that causes problems. Not the afk cloaker.
The agressor will always have the element of surprise. That is, only he knows when he will jump in and engage. That is how it should be too. As a defender, you must take measures to make sure he dies when he attacks you. As for him being without risk, I'd say he took a pretty big risk getting inside sovereign alliance space, and he takes risks every time he actually does something.
Removing local would make it fair for both the agressor and the defender. Otherwise, again imo, a recon or covert ops that is cloaked should not show up in local.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Beltantis Torrence
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:56:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Dude. You're scared of someone who isn't even at the keyboard. You fail. I personally don't even think local should name the people in the system unless they talk.
It's quite amusing to read so many posts defending AFK cloakers while at the same time spewing that space shouldn't be safe .
I love the eve forum hipocricies
I'm not spewing anything. Why are you afraid of someone who isn't even at the keyboard? What're they going to do to you anyway? If they attack you - kill them. Then they won't be safe anymore.
|
Zulu Six
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:56:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Zulu Six
Shut up, Ki An mate, everybody knows PvPers are bad people. Anybody who is ignorant and immature enough to lock another player's ship and shoot first is a piece of crap in real life. You should just learn to mind your own business and let those poor guys mine and rat and run missions etc.
Nice straw man there .
How's it working out for ya?
Quite well, thanks.
I am Havohej's alt. I would post with my main, but it's banned vOv |
White Ronin
Screenout
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 15:02:00 -
[80]
...and in conclusion.
I believe this game will really be improved and made even more successful if you just listen to our selfish demands. Who cares if someone else's playstyle is ruined, just as long as mine is not only not damaged but enhanced by this change.
Rock paper scissors is a game that everyone (that I care about) agrees should be made as the guiding light of this game.
Please do not stray from your successful game model by allowing content or activities that everyone can enjoy. Rather, focusing on what large corp's and over-vocal forum warriors think should be done is obviously the right move for everyone.
Thank you for your time Sony and I think once you obey our wines to make it easier for us to do what we want, Star Wars Galaxies will become the name in mmo gaming.
Yours truly.
The Vocal Minority and the Big Guild/Corp Self-Interests.
|
Nicholas Barker
MASS
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 15:11:00 -
[81]
the best way to do it, is to set your alarm clock for every 1 or 2 hours with the keyboard within reach of your bed, then when your alarm clock goes off, type something stupid in local like a wave or say hello to a specific person in local. Reset your alarm clock, go back to sleep :)
also i've just thought of how to make afk cloaking so much better.
---
|
Kaworu Tabris
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 15:45:00 -
[82]
I totally understand the BACON bit. BACON was/is bad for the community as a whole (although I could argue that a simple audio warning system like BACON would make perfect sense in the setting . . . it just raises too many ethical problems in a game such as EvE).
But . . . are you seriously trying to tell me that someone sitting in a ship afk is terrifying to you? I mean . . . thinking a hostile/neut is in a system and not docked is one thing, but classifying this as a form of terror?
Personally, I grab a cheap ship, scan for awhile, then weigh the risks. Isn't that part of the game: Risks vs Rewards?
|
Sakura Nihil
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:04:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Marisal
Bacon was nothing about been afk, it abused a game function in a manner is was not supposed to be used absolutely nothing to do with afk play.
[/endthread]
Goal Line Blitz, an American Football browser game. |
Freya Runestone
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:12:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 13:35:03
How the **** is knowing his ship type and setup going to matter if he's just going to go cloak again for another 20 hours AFK? And all the while he naps or watches TV the rest of us take notes and hope he attacks while we're logged in? AGAIN, where's his risk during his 20-hour AFK cloak?
where is your risk during the very same period?
You don't have any additional risk as long as he is AFK. and as soon as he comes back and decides to attack something. He's got the same amount of risk as you do. He could jump in to a trap. and Unlike you, he's not gonna be able to replace his ship. Or hide until he gets a new one.
|
InSession
Minmatar Mafia
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:15:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Stuff
Cloaking Ravens that are immune to anything once safe spotted and cloaked are more annoying tbh. An AFK cloaker in a system is either there just to **** you off, is part of a gang that should arrive shortly (if at all), or a Recon of some sort. Any other ship cloaking is going to take quite some time to lock you, and if you are aligned anyways you have nothing to worry about.
|
Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Tri Optimum
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:50:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Sikozu Prioris
AFK cloakers are not a problem.
If you cant muster a defence to kill a single guy when he attacks you shouldnt be in 0.0.
If he is afk for 20 hours of the day he is not disrupting anything, as HE IS NOT DOING ANYTHING.
THIS!
for all the people that think AFK cloaking is the ultimate in warfare.
lets assume the following. you're in a system that has several people in it. you're hunting NPCs. one AFK cloaker is "disrupting" your operations.
do you know how an AFK cloaker reacts when everytime he tries to kill something the rest of the people warps in - combat ready - to spoil his fun? i guess after a few tries he *will* leave bored.
is it so difficult to organize yourself? you know like - forming a gang, adjusting your PvE fitting a *tiny* bit more to the PvP side of the game, getting on coms? you know - the stuff that can save your ship.
it's not like a reconship can instakill anything bigger than a t1 frigate.
___________________
-Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
|
Tankn00blicus
Cosmic Vacum Cleaners
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:56:00 -
[87]
Removing local would make AFK cloaking completely pointless, but I'm afraid that it could also buff nano since everyone would be losing precious intel thus making the uber survivability of nano sound like an even better idea.
|
Arctur Ceti
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:02:00 -
[88]
And not only this. But cloaking is also useful for those engaging in PVE activites in low sec and 0.0. Sometimes there aren't stations around to dock in. Cloaking allows NPCers to survive pirate attacks.
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:25:00 -
[89]
The usual suggestion of removing local:
- Fixes afk cloakers.
- Fixes cloaks.
There, everybody happy.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:40:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Freya Runestone
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 13:35:03
How the **** is knowing his ship type and setup going to matter if he's just going to go cloak again for another 20 hours AFK? And all the while he naps or watches TV the rest of us take notes and hope he attacks while we're logged in? AGAIN, where's his risk during his 20-hour AFK cloak?
where is your risk during the very same period?
You don't have any additional risk as long as he is AFK. and as soon as he comes back and decides to attack something. He's got the same amount of risk as you do. He could jump in to a trap. and Unlike you, he's not gonna be able to replace his ship. Or hide until he gets a new one.
That's my whole point. The rest of the system has to be in alert mode while the cloaked AFK'er doesn't. Everyone else is on the lookout and ready for combat. Why shouldn't the cloaked ship also be on alert? The locals don't know if the cloaked player is AFK, so they have to be alert 100% of the time. Their threat is very real. While the threat to the cloaker isn't. It's non-existent. I suggest that if they are AFK then they are automatically logged out after say an inactive period of 15 minutes.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |