| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Matrix Skye
   |
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:08:00 -
[1]
As you are aware it seems that with the next patch comes a fix to the BACON program which gives an audio warning when hostiles enter a system. The reasoning behind the fix is that such a program allows players to play semi-AFK and thus reduces the risk of playing.
ThatÆs all fine and dandy. But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems without any repercussions all while AFK? In essence, I can cloak in a 0.0 system and terrorize such system without any other form of interaction required from my part and any risk whatsoever all while such system is STILL required to interact with what may possibly be an AFK player. IsnÆt this the very reason why you hate applications such as BACON, because they encourage AFK play?
I want to be clear that I donÆt use BACON nor am I interested in using such an application. But I do find it interesting that one form is allowed while the other is quickly put down. Is it a coincidence the one that benefits aggressors (mostly the pirate types) is allowed to exist while the one that works against them isnÆt? You acted against BACON quickly yet up to date you have taken no actions against what is probably the most abusive form of AFK play in the game.
Why does it seem you seek to always æbalanceÆ the ærisk versus rewardÆ elements affecting mostly targets but leave intact the shady mechanics that benefit the aggressors? As another example is the gang mechanics. Now it seems you will finally be fixing this with the upcoming patch. But why did it take so long all the while being abused in high sec? IÆm just trying to understand why this whole ærisk vs. rewardÆ mantra only applies to players that choose not to be aggressors.
Flame away!
|
Marisal
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:10:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Marisal on 08/06/2008 19:11:54
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.
Meh just fed the troll didn't I
|
Insidi Us
Suicidal Mercenaries
Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:19:00 -
[3]
Where's that Desu sig that makes fun of people like the OP?
By the way, I really wish there was a way to tell where a post ends and a signature starts. |
Gone'Postal
Scoopex
The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:19:00 -
[4]
AFK Cloaked ships can't terrorize jack.
Questions, Comments, Problems, Please address them to the CSM..
Now CCP Never have to visit the forum.
-V8I-
|
Aadi Grox
Minmatar Mafia
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:23:00 -
[5]
Why would they fix something that isn't broken?
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:23:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Aadi Grox
Why would they fix something that isn't broken?
*facepalm*
But they're annoying as hell and need fixing just like cloaks on cap ships.
I refuse to respect religious beliefs, and i refuse to respect people who hold them. |
Rawr Cristina
Naqam
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:35:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Aadi Grox
Why would they fix something that isn't broken?
this imo.
...
|
Grarr Dexx
Naval Protection Corp
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:37:00 -
[8]
One minute to see he's an AFK cloaker, 1439 minutes left in the day to have fun without having to worry about anything.
|
Tippia
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:37:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Gone'Postal
AFK Cloaked ships can't terrorize jack.
I must say, that claim confused me too… 
|
Zulu Six
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:31:00 -
[10]
AFK cloaking isn't broken.
I am Havohej's alt. I would post with my main, but it's banned vOv |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:32:00 -
[11]
AFK cloakers... can't talk, can't spy, can't move, can't shoot, can't do jack... but SOMEHOW he still "terrorizes" a whole system... 
1|2|3|4|5 |
Spineker
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:36:00 -
[12]
If I were building starships or warships an audible and visual warning would pop up when a jumpgate was activated. It would be very easy for a computer to pick it up.
The problem is it takes light about 8 minutes to travel a AU so if you are 18 AU from the jump gate then it would be 144 minutes before the warning would reach your ship so you would be long dead. So realistically doesn't work I suppose so my detection device is a waste of space. 
|
Arvald
The Ninjapirates
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:39:00 -
[13]
cloaking is fine move along nothing to see here
Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw
Stealthbomber combat(or as i like to call it: Just because you are paranoid dont mean there isnt a invissible demon about to eat your face)
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:49:00 -
[14]
Or, in alternate words...
"In this thread : metagamer (using "local" as an intel tool) complains about metagaming (AFK cloaking) designed to counteract the usefulness of his particular metagaming style"
Why, the solutions is simple, isn't it ?
Remove "local"...
1|2|3|4|5 |
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:03:00 -
[15]
Have you tried moving to a different system? You know, there are other systems in the eve universe, it is a pretty big universe.
Actually because the afk cloaker is clearly in local you can fit your ship to be anti recon (hello mr heavy unstable neutralizer) and since you are in friendly space you can quickly get reinforcements faster so I don't see a problem here. Sounds like your corp/alliance sucks monkey dongs if you can't deal with a simple cov ops/force recon ship.
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Please refrain from making assumptions on game mechanics and then presenting them as facts before testing them yourself.
|
Armoured C
Globaltech Industries
The ENTITY.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:07:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Armoured C on 08/06/2008 21:07:30
cloakers should burn ... i mean the AFK ones
but they arnt causing any harm for the fact that they are screwing with you intel
could be one of the phycoligal mind games they play with you to make you feel insecure in space and so your more likely to leave
i love my mind games in eve
multiple cynos in the same system has been one of my best so far
picture here
never trust any link i post =P
you have been warned |
ShadowMaiden
Metal Machine
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:46:00 -
[17]
The obvious question being - on what evidence do you determine that someone is AFK? ( other then the usual "they are AFK because I say so" type response)
SM.
I wish I was a 3ft Doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes |
trite boon
Personal Vendetta
Vendetta Alliance.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:46:00 -
[18]
Edited by: trite boon on 08/06/2008 21:47:32
Edited by: trite boon on 08/06/2008 21:47:04
Bacon is a 3rd part program the cloak is part of the game deal with it rat or mine with or other players
|
Armoured C
Globaltech Industries
The ENTITY.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:51:00 -
[19]
there notyhing wrong with cloaking espically when people are smartbombing in high sec then the concord comes and the smartbombing have stopped yeah that was in no realtion to me in my covert op ship
"in warlinks i trust" |
Feilamya
Pelennor Swarm
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 22:31:00 -
[20]
BACON was an exploit of a security hole in the client
(that was tolerated by CCP - something I do not understand at all...)
AFK cloaking is legit game mechanics.
Exploits get fixed, game mechanics get nerfed. Don't confuse the two.
BTW here is how I would fix ... sorry, I mean nerf AFK cloaking: If someone cloaks, he disappears in local. Sounds easy, huh? It's "realistic" too, because you can't see him, so you don't know he's there. And if the local carebears don't see the AFK cloaker in local, they won't be scared and can go back to their roids and rats. Problem solved?
|
Dr Slaughter
Rabies Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 23:48:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Akita T
AFK cloakers... can't talk, can't spy, can't move, can't shoot, can't do jack... but SOMEHOW he still "terrorizes" a whole system...
It's the fear of that one, single, unknown ship. Keeps you docked don't ya know? I mean, you know, it might actually be fitted with guns and stuff...
Solution 1.
Leave cloaks alone.
Emergency warp/logout any ship who's keyboard/mouse hasn't been touched in 1 hour unless they're in a POS.
Solution 2.
Leave cloaks alone.
Remove local. Keep constellation for chat.
Add a POS module that adds 'local' but only for alliance pilots in their own sovereign territory.
Solution 3.
Stop whining and carry on as we have for YEARS
Rabies is unexpected
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
dealing with the UNDERPANTS of eve since 2004 |
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 23:50:00 -
[22]
Since the best way to nerf AFK cloaking practice is simply by removing local chat info, I fully support the AFK cloaking nerf.
lets remove local chat and make AFK cloaking moot
|
Arlenna Molatov
The 59th Parallel
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 02:52:00 -
[23]
Everyone in this game since day one has always used the phrase......
"THERE IS NO 100% SAFE AREA!!!"
Now, with any cloak being able to be used on any ship, they can sit anywhere and be completely 100% safe. It doesnt matter if they aren't moving around or if they are/are not AFK. Like I said, since day one in this game there has never been a guarenteed SAFE area/spot/place/thing in this game....yet!!... here we have one.
So yes, cloaking IS broken!! Cloaking is safer than a 1.0 system sitting next to 100 concord AND within docking range of a station.
Whatneeds to happen is being able to probe out the "lessor" cloaking devices, but not the covert ops. Covert op cloaks are just that, covert ops. But the other 2 or 3 devices are NOT covert ops and are farther down the tech tree and there-for should be able to be probed out.
That would get rid of your 100% safe spotted regular cloaked ships but you would still be able to sit in your nice snuggy covert-cloaked ship without any chance of harm comming to you.
But we all know, since covert ops can only be put on ships that dont have extreme firepower or silly silly speed setups, there will be incessant whining and threats of mass-quittings. I could care less.
Fix the cloaks.
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:48:00 -
[24]
Afk cloaking is for those that need to help the mrs do the dishes before she packs her bags and leaves.
Solves:
"i just need to dock"
"i'm in a safespot and they have probes!"
and my favourite
"im in a system with no stations, the gates are camped and i have an aggro timer"
kthnxbye RL more important than eve.
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Xparky
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:51:00 -
[25]
I wish i was a mod and could point people to one, single, main thread anti cloaking ....
. |
Apoctasy
The Python Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:55:00 -
[26]
AS stated in the patch notes, EA will render Bacon useless as third-party applications cannot access the Eve logs.
|
Sicil Fioet
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:59:00 -
[27]
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 04:02:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
what about RL?
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Corduroy Rab
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 04:25:00 -
[29]
What if cloaking devices were divided into two different categories such as combat and intelligence? More types of cloaking devices would naturally have to be introduced but the idea would be that if you were fitting a combat cloak you could be detected if somebody put some effort into finding you, by using special probes or something of that nature. The upside of the combat cloak would be that there would be minimal drawbacks, if any, on your ship stats.
One the other hand you could fit an intelligence cloak that would greatly hamper a ships ability to be combat effective but would disallow the ship from being detected, short of someone accidentally crashing into you.
I have more non-recons in mind with this, anyways, just a thought.
|
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 05:57:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
what about RL?
Ctrl-Q ... I see no problem.
EVE Online: a cold, cruel world where (RL-)rich people replace their losses with GTCs sold to poor students who need to farm ISK to afford their play time ...
|
TZeer
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 08:04:00 -
[31]
Edited by: TZeer on 09/06/2008 08:11:43
Edited by: TZeer on 09/06/2008 08:11:19
Edited by: TZeer on 09/06/2008 08:04:34
Originally by: Pan Crastus
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
what about RL?
Ctrl-Q ... I see no problem.
Agrotimer...
still in space, probed down, killed...
I will say this again.
CCP, in a recent devblog gave us a short summary of what they where thinking of doing with cloaks/local.
- Ships not designed to fit cloak would be possible ot scan down, but it would take some time and some effort.
- Ships designed to fit cloaks, like black ops, covert ops, recons would be very hard or close to impossible to scan down.
- Local would be changed, it would not work like an instant intel tool like it`s used now.
They where lookin at different ways of dealing with it. One was having local just show numbers.
You could still get intel, but you actually had to work for it
All this would come into game as a complete package when it was done.
|
Mark Lucius
Kinetic Vector
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 09:21:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Akita T
AFK cloakers... can't talk, can't spy, can't move, can't shoot, can't do jack... but SOMEHOW he still "terrorizes" a whole system...
qft 
---
|
Neddy Fox
Paxton Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 09:30:00 -
[33]
They can disable whole ops, because they can be a threat, now, in 30 mins, or in 3.5 hours.
Solution : let cloaks use fuel, giving it a max of 1 hour cloaking.
|
Sicil Fioet
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:17:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
what about RL?
before you head into hostile territory you make provisions IRL that you will have enough time to get out as well or to find an isolated where you can log off and disappear in 2 minutes
this goes for all ships and cloaky ones should not be any different
|
Ki An
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:22:00 -
[35]
Like others have said, it's not the cloaker that is the problem. The problem is that even if the cloaker is cloaked, others can still "sense" his precense in local, and that freaks them out. The one and only solution is to remove local, or at least severely nerf it as an intel tool.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Fanjita
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:26:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems
how do these people 'terrorize' a system if theyre AFK as far as i understand the term afk it means away from keyboard if said players are afk they cant terrorize much apart from there pet cat. If you are in a system with an afk cloaker what are you worried about there afk, though how you know whether they are afk begs another question are you a hacker who has hacked the afk persons pc to know if they are afk or not?
|
Sicil Fioet
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:32:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Sicil Fioet on 09/06/2008 10:34:14
Originally by: Akita T
AFK cloakers... can't talk, can't spy, can't move, can't shoot, can't do jack... but SOMEHOW he still "terrorizes" a whole system...
recon ships can warp around or "move" cloaked, sit invisible in a belt, de-cloak, lock and kill within a few minutes, cloak up and disappear before any help arrives - they terrorize the entire system since people in it are afraid to go belt ratting, granted some just overestimate the capabilities of afk cloaker, nevertheless the threat is very real for newer players who do not fair as well in 1vs1 engagements of this kind
Originally by: Fanjita
Originally by: Matrix Skye
But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems
how do these people 'terrorize' a system if theyre AFK as far as i understand the term afk it means away from keyboard if said players are afk they cant terrorize much apart from there pet cat. If you are in a system with an afk cloaker what are you worried about there afk, though how you know whether they are afk begs another question are you a hacker who has hacked the afk persons pc to know if they are afk or not?
because you never know if they are really afk or sitting in belt next to your ratting ship or mining barge preparing to decloak, scamble, and kill you - you don't know that precisely because you are not a hacker
|
Neddy Fox
Paxton Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:34:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Fanjita
how do these people 'terrorize' a system if theyre AFK as far as i understand the term afk it means away from keyboard if said players are afk they cant terrorize much apart from there pet cat. If you are in a system with an afk cloaker what are you worried about there afk, though how you know whether they are afk begs another question are you a hacker who has hacked the afk persons pc to know if they are afk or not?
\
You go with an ice mining op, sitting in an icebelt with 20 mackinaws, and have someone cloaked for 4 hours.
Don't nitpick on works like AFK, since they might, or might not be AFK. Thing is, they can come any moment they like, and kill a few easy ships, now, in 5 mins, or 3 hours. They can shutdown whole systems.
|
Grim Vandal
Burn Proof
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:40:00 -
[39]
eg. pegasus radar complex for boosters production - stay cloaked there and no one can run this complex anymore 23/7 - is this an intended feature?
let cloakers be scannable and this prolbem is fixed ... someone playing while cloaked will still never be catched ...
Greetings Grim |
AKULA UrQuan
Druuge Crimson Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:48:00 -
[40]
As someone who has spent way too much time in a covert ops frig the best perk of the job is spreading fear and paranoia throughout half a constellation. Since there is alot of time to kill while doing this job one can dream up some interesting ways to tourture the locals. It's great.
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:09:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
would be nice if we could probe them out over long periods of time
something like you can cloak and sit afk but only for say fifteen minutes until someone can pick up your trace and warp on top of you
what about RL?
before you head into hostile territory you make provisions IRL that you will have enough time to get out as well or to find an isolated where you can log off and disappear in 2 minutes
this goes for all ships and cloaky ones should not be any different
thats fine if you live at home with your mum
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:15:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Fanjita
Originally by: Matrix Skye
But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems
how do these people 'terrorize' a system if theyre AFK as far as i understand the term afk it means away from keyboard if said players are afk they cant terrorize much apart from there pet cat. If you are in a system with an afk cloaker what are you worried about there afk, though how you know whether they are afk begs another question are you a hacker who has hacked the afk persons pc to know if they are afk or not?
Now I know you KNOW how they terrorize a system. But I'll entertain your silly question anyway.
How do I know if they're AFK you ask? Well I DON'T! But when you have a hostile cloaked for 23 hours a day for days in a single system you and I both know what they're doing. They're interacting with the system all while remaing 100% comfortable and safe. Where's the balance in that? Why is the system forced to play and interact based on what this single player (who could possibly not even be at the keyboard) does or doesn't do?
If you're cloaked and in 0.0 space you're 100% safe. 100% SAFE IN SPACE IN EVE! Where's your "no where in Eve is safe" mantra there? AFK cloaking is broken and it's about time CCP fixes it.
|
Freya Runestone
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:25:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Arlenna Molatov
Everyone in this game since day one has always used the phrase......
"THERE IS NO 100% SAFE AREA!!!"
Now, with any cloak being able to be used on any ship, they can sit anywhere and be completely 100% safe. It doesnt matter if they aren't moving around or if they are/are not AFK. Like I said, since day one in this game there has never been a guarenteed SAFE area/spot/place/thing in this game....yet!!... here we have one.
So yes, cloaking IS broken!! Cloaking is safer than a 1.0 system sitting next to 100 concord AND within docking range of a station.
Whatneeds to happen is being able to probe out the "lessor" cloaking devices, but not the covert ops. Covert op cloaks are just that, covert ops. But the other 2 or 3 devices are NOT covert ops and are farther down the tech tree and there-for should be able to be probed out.
That would get rid of your 100% safe spotted regular cloaked ships but you would still be able to sit in your nice snuggy covert-cloaked ship without any chance of harm comming to you.
But we all know, since covert ops can only be put on ships that dont have extreme firepower or silly silly speed setups, there will be incessant whining and threats of mass-quittings. I could care less.
Fix the cloaks.
it might be safe. but so what? its pretty much the same to the only other safe place. a station. You can't do much sitting at a safe while cloaked.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:38:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 11:40:56
Originally by: Freya Runestone
it might be safe. but so what? its pretty much the same to the only other safe place. a station. You can't do much sitting at a safe while cloaked.
Yes you can. You force the players around you to interact and take precautions while you need to take none other than cloak and go watch TV. So some players have to look out for you and guess what you may or may not be doing while you sit safe at a SS cloaked. Where the **** is YOUR risk? Oh I guess that doesn't apply to you .
|
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:44:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 11:40:56
Originally by: Freya Runestone
it might be safe. but so what? its pretty much the same to the only other safe place. a station. You can't do much sitting at a safe while cloaked.
Yes you can. You force the players around you to interact and take precautions while you need to take none other than cloak and go watch TV. So some players have to look out for you and guess what you may or may not be doing while you sit safe at a SS cloaked. Where the **** is YOUR risk? Oh I guess that doesn't apply to you .
Well the risk comes if he actually attempts to do something other than just sit there.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:50:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Esmenet
Well the risk comes if he actually attempts to do something other than just sit there.
Yet the longer he sits there cloaked he wears down his enemies' resolve, accomplishing exactly what he wants without risk. He controls 100% when and where while being 100% safe. And his risk comes if he decides to attack the mining ship in the belt. Nice . You lot are a bunch of hipocritical rats.
|
Ilvan
Post with your Brain
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:58:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Neddy Fox
You go with an ice mining op, sitting in an icebelt with 20 mackinaws, and have someone cloaked for 4 hours.
Don't nitpick on works like AFK, since they might, or might not be AFK. Thing is, they can come any moment they like, and kill a few easy ships, now, in 5 mins, or 3 hours. They can shutdown whole systems.
Then bring some military support? durrr
Space is not 100% secure, news at 11.
_______________________________
In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag |
AKULA UrQuan
Druuge Crimson Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:01:00 -
[48]
Edited by: AKULA UrQuan on 09/06/2008 12:04:19
The mineing ship could be cheese...Oh I'm pretty sure it's possible to sit at a SS uncloaked and be impossible to scan out. Might even be able to carry enough weapons to kill something as well.
Looks like a good enough reason to do something stupid as any. I haven't been petitioned in a long time now. 
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:02:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Ilvan
Space is not 100% secure, news at 11.
...Unless you're cloaked at a safe spot.
I love pirate mantra . Because obviously not being 100% safe doesn't apply to you.
|
Ilvan
Post with your Brain
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:07:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Ilvan
Space is not 100% secure, news at 11.
...Unless you're cloaked at a safe spot.
I love pirate mantra . Because obviously not being 100% safe doesn't apply to you.
Being AFK cloaked in a safe spot is like being docked in a station: untouchable but at the same time unable to do anything.
_______________________________
In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag |
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:13:00 -
[51]
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. 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.
|
Ilvan
Post with your Brain
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:19:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
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. 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.
Wahhhhhh.
CCP has already stated that cloaks are becoming less of a binary "can't touch this" toggle, so stop whining. Consult post #32 in this thread for more info.
In the meantime, if you want to mine in dangerous space, take combat support. All I can say.
_______________________________
In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag |
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:22:00 -
[53]
Quote:
You go with an ice mining op, sitting in an icebelt with 20 mackinaws, and have someone cloaked for 4 hours.
Don't nitpick on works like AFK, since they might, or might not be AFK. Thing is, they can come any moment they like, and kill a few easy ships, now, in 5 mins, or 3 hours. They can shutdown whole systems.
If you're incapable of protecting a mining op from a single cloaker, you don't deserve to be in 0.0. 0.0 is supposed to be dangerous... as a cloaker that tries to attack a competently-defended mining/ratting op will find out.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:28:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Matrix Skye on 09/06/2008 12:28:50
Originally by: Gypsio III
If you're incapable of protecting a mining op from a single cloaker, you don't deserve to be in 0.0. 0.0 is supposed to be dangerous... as a cloaker that tries to attack a competently-defended mining/ratting op will find out.
Did you type this with a straight face?
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:39:00 -
[55]
As you mine away in complete safety, beady eyes fixed on local, listening to your scouts and intel channels, I must ask: "Did you?".
|
Neddy Fox
Paxton Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 12:43:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Gypsio III
If you're incapable of protecting a mining op from a single cloaker, you don't deserve to be in 0.0. 0.0 is supposed to be dangerous... as a cloaker that tries to attack a competently-defended mining/ratting op will find out.
So your cloaked smartbomb battleship, worth 80 mill can be killed before it takes out 10 macks ?
Plz show me this setup, I'm rather noobish, and i'd like to learn from the masters.
It's pretty simple : we DO have military presence, but as they can't find bloody afk cloakers, the miners are forced to stay docked / at a pos until he's found. And since he's watching TV, or walking the dog, cloaked, he grinds a whole system to a halt.
Again : Let cloakers run on fuel, that will sort things bigtime.
|
Ilvan
Post with your Brain
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:15:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Rastigan
No cloaking device should be able to make ships hidden from probes, they should just apply a hidden multiplier (ala deadspace) depending on which cloaking device they are using with Covops cloak II being the strongest.
Which is what CCP is apparently doing.
Won't stop people from whining, though, just like the jet-can flagging didn't stop people from whining about ore thieves.
_______________________________
In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag |
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:23:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Ilvan
But he's not safe if he actually tries to do something. And if he's doing something, he's not "AFK cloaking", is he? He's waiting.
PS. "hypocrite"
But a cloaked AFK ship in 0.0 IS doing something . He's got everyone in the system on red alert while he's at school or sleeping. But then again you know this. And yet you still defend your risk-free AFK cloak. All the while still preaching "nowhere's safe blah blah blah".
|
Rastigan
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:24:00 -
[59]
Now they need to fix the aggression timer so that you can hold people in space..
As it is, you can warp an interceptor to a belt, when the ratter sees the interceptor show up on overview slowing from warp, the ratter can ctrl-q before being aggressed and disappear in roughly 1 minute, heck sometimes you cant even target them and they still E-warp off.
I've given up combat probing because there is no point catching the SS of the logged off ratter and calling in the gang so they can watch him disappear in 15 seconds. I dont understand why the aggression timer cant be applied to ships still in space, but logged out..
|
Freya Runestone
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:26:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Esmenet
Well the risk comes if he actually attempts to do something other than just sit there.
Yet the longer he sits there cloaked he wears down his enemies' resolve, accomplishing exactly what he wants without risk. He controls 100% when and where while being 100% safe. And his risk comes if he decides to attack the mining ship in the belt. Nice . You lot are a bunch of hipocritical rats.
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
|
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.
|
Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 20:22:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
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.
And I still suggest that you find some other MMO that will make you feel safe. There must be plenty of games that can deliver that needed sense of safety. My suggestion is not intended to be smack, I'm just saying that some other game might be better suited to your prefered game style.
|
Rastigan
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 21:06:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Space Wanderer
The usual suggestion of removing local:
- Fixes afk cloakers.
- Fixes cloaks.
There, everybody happy.
It also ruins 0.0 for everyone , including the gankers..
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 21:11:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Ra Vhim
And I still suggest that you find some other MMO that will make you feel safe. There must be plenty of games that can deliver that needed sense of safety. My suggestion is not intended to be smack, I'm just saying that some other game might be better suited to your prefered game style.
Nice
Why would I want to find a safe game when I can just cozy up in 0.0 cloaked and don't even have to be at the keyboard while I put the whole system on alert?
The one avoiding risk here is you. I'm asking you where your risk is and you tell me to go to another game? Great way to avoid the question though.
|
Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 21:26:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Ra Vhim
And I still suggest that you find some other MMO that will make you feel safe. There must be plenty of games that can deliver that needed sense of safety. My suggestion is not intended to be smack, I'm just saying that some other game might be better suited to your prefered game style.
Nice
Why would I want to find a safe game when I can just cozy up in 0.0 cloaked and don't even have to be at the keyboard while I put the whole system on alert?
The one avoiding risk here is you. I'm asking you where your risk is and you tell me to go to another game? Great way to avoid the question though.
But... an AFK cloaker isn't doing anything! The only thing stopping you from ratting and mining is your fear for that lone neutral/hostile in local. You know for a fact that he can not engage you when he is cloaked, you also know that all ships that are fitted with a cloak (save a bomber) have a severe scan resolution penalty, giving you plenty of time to react. If you have a "whole system on alert" then the risk involved for you should be close to zero. The cloaker should have far worse odds.
It isn't the AFK cloaker that stop the whole system from being active, it is the fear/anxiety/stress some people feel because there is a slight risk involved when ratting or mining. Plenty of people either ignore the cloaker, confident that they can deal with it in some way if he decloak, or they try to bait him into decloaking. You are not among those people and that is why you want to nerf the cloak. It is also the reason I suggested that it might be an idea to find a game where you don't experience that disturbance to your game play.
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 21:54:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Rastigan
Originally by: Space Wanderer
The usual suggestion of removing local:
- Fixes afk cloakers.
- Fixes cloaks.
There, everybody happy.
It also ruins 0.0 for everyone , including the gankers..
Why would that be? You mean that the fact that the gankers have actually to gather their intel ruins 0.0 for them? Or you mean that the fact that the 0.0 ratters have to actually take care of scanning their system ruins 0.0 for them? Seriously, if you need a silver-platter intel that's just another way to be carebearish, be it ganker, ratter or fleet commander.
Now, to be fair, removing local should probably be accompanied by some improvements in the directional/onboard scanner to make it a bit more versatile. But I don't feel that it is indispensable.
|
Rastigan
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:06:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Rastigan on 10/06/2008 00:06:42
Originally by: Space Wanderer
Why would that be? You mean that the fact that the gankers have actually to gather their intel ruins 0.0 for them? Or you mean that the fact that the 0.0 ratters have to actually take care of scanning their system ruins 0.0 for them? Seriously, if you need a silver-platter intel that's just another way to be carebearish, be it ganker, ratter or fleet commander.
Now, to be fair, removing local should probably be accompanied by some improvements in the directional/onboard scanner to make it a bit more versatile. But I don't feel that it is indispensable.
People rat/mine in 0.0 because the risk vs reward is good. Take that away and you lose the a core amount of players in 0.0.. Without local Force Recons and Covops are suddenly more powerfull than before because they will always get a guaranteed tackle.
The existence of solo/small groups of players doing non-PvP things will diminish to the point that there is no reason for small pvp gangs to go hunting.
Make CTRL-Q the only and best way to avoid combat..
As it is, its not very hard for attackers to use the ingame map information to find out
- #police and faction ships destroyed in a system, faction ships = rats.
- #of players in the system/docked
That plus knowing where the good ore/good true sec of the region you are hunting in especially around station systems and you are guaranteed to find people.
What exactly does a defender have ? local and spamming the scan button 50,000 times.
Yes you could have scouts,and scouts are used for larger scale operations, but that defeats the ability of one player/small groups of players to do anything productive.
The best solution of local = Make a ship appear in local ONLY and ONLY when his GATE cloak is removed.. This allows the attacker to scan 15au within that gate for information. It also allows a scout to assess the system, call in the rest of the gang and have a larger element of surprise, since the scout and the gang will appear in local simultaneously.
Prevents gate campers from knowing the exact number of hostiles till they decloak.
It also gives the defenders/targets some time to have a fighting chance of running away, and eliminates the need to redo the entire intel system in Eve.
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:34:00 -
[97]
Quote:
That's my whole point. The rest of the system has to be in alert mode
You realise you don't *have* to be in 'alert' mode
But seriously, people say all the time (especially to carebears) "EVE is a *MM*ORPG, get out there and make friends/join a 0.0 alliance.
You're only at risk from *one* afk cloaker if you're going about solo. Buddy system anyone? One ATK cloaker isn't going to take on two ratters...
|
Schani Kratnorr
x13
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:39:00 -
[98]
Quote:
But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems without any repercussions all while AFK?
I didn't know I could terrorize people while not being at my computer.
(rushes of to put cloaking device on all ships)
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:48:00 -
[99]
Quote:
I didn't know I could terrorize people while not being at my computer.
(rushes of to put cloaking device on all ships)
Bugger that, I'm going AFK with a cloak on in jita!
1. Go AFK cloaked in Jita
2. ????
3. Profit (apparently)
But if AFK cloaking is such a problem so far as "terrorizing people without repercussion" goes, they should *fix* suicide ganking too
Note: I am not an advocate for 'removing' suicide ganking.
|
Guillame Herschel
The Graduates
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:53:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 10/06/2008 00:55:18
Originally by: Matrix Skye
ThatÆs all fine and dandy. But now why are AFK cloakers allowed to terrorize systems without any repercussions all while AFK?
Because you are a mental weakling if a cloaked ship terrorizes you, and good war strategy dictates hitting the enemy's weak spots. Your weakness is an irrational fear of an invisible player who is not present and has no weapons, and I'd exploit it too.
-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then --
|
Guillame Herschel
The Graduates
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:01:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Arlenna Molatov
Everyone in this game since day one has always used the phrase......
"THERE IS NO 100% SAFE AREA!!!"
Apart from stations. And tutorial missions. And being cloaked at a safe spot (which isn't really 100% safe, the cat could jump on the keyboard and hit F1 by accident).
Hey, you know what? Maybe everybody has been wrong since day one.
-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then --
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:08:00 -
[102]
Quote:
Hey, you know what? Maybe everybody has been wrong since day one.
But,, but,,, the customer is always right?
Generally in my experience working in days gone by at a Supermarket (and believe me, that's the best place to experience it), not only is the customer generally wrong, but they'll also lie and exaggerate.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:22:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel
... And being cloaked at a safe spot (which isn't really 100% safe, the cat could jump on the keyboard and hit F1 by accident).
You know, I didn't think of that. You're right. If you own a cat there is risk to AFK cloaking.
I retract the OP.
|
Matrix Skye
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:28:00 -
[104]
I must say you lot get very creative when defending your i-wins .
Bottom line is risk vs reward doesnt apply to 0.0 cloakers!
I'm out \o/
|
GB Man
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:34:00 -
[105]
Rely on Local Much?
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:39:00 -
[106]
Quote:
I must say you lot get very creative when defending your i-wins Laughing.
Bottom line is risk vs reward doesnt apply to 0.0 cloakers!
Creative hey? So dare I ask what "reward" comes from being AFK cloaked at a safespot in 0.0? I'm certainly not firing weapons or mining while I'm cloaked.
|
Ephemeron
Anti-BoB
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:44:00 -
[107]
Some people have really unhealthy attitude toward ship loss
All other issues aside, imagine that you have to rat in 1 system with AFK cloaker. For sake of the argument, imagine that the cloaker WILL kill you when he comes back, which is on average 1 time per 23 hours (so if you farm less, he misses you more often).
Now an average ratter in 0.0 makes 20 mil isk per hour. (including occasional faction spawn)
A fully insured raven with some T2 mods is going to cost 50 mil. That means, in just 2.5 hours of farming, you fully cover the cost of your NEXT farming ship.
If you are a hardcore farmer that farms 6-12 hours a day. You can easily afford to lose a battleship every day and still make a huge profit. But if you choose to be a paranoic and wait every day for the AFK cloaker to leave your system, you don't make any money. You waste your own game time for nothing.
So, don't be such a pussy, slightly adjust your setup to better handle the threat, FIGHT back when he attacks. And don't complain when you die, because you still make tons of profit
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |