Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Plumpy McPudding
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:53:00 -
[1]
I've read a few posts where several people have mentioned that cloaking is broken. It is? __________________________
Fear me for I have an insatiable appetite! Proprietor and inventor of Chocolate Chip Chocolate Donut flavored Ice Cream. |
CrayC
Gallente CrayC Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:03:00 -
[2]
Depends on what you mean by broken... My cloak breaks every time I get within 2km of something
|
Plumpy McPudding
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:04:00 -
[3]
Originally by: CrayC Depends on what you mean by broken... My cloak breaks every time I get within 2km of something
That's why I'm asking. People just gloss over it and don't say anything other than its broken.
I'm thinking BS. __________________________
Fear me for I have an insatiable appetite! Proprietor and inventor of Chocolate Chip Chocolate Donut flavored Ice Cream. |
Ruze
Amarr No Applicable Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:08:00 -
[4]
Both broken and overpowered at the same time. You can't go within 2km of any object, and there are plenty of times when I come upon something real small that wasn't on my overview. Not sure if that's broken, per se, but it is annoying.
In the same breath, there's no way to find a cloaked ship. You can go afk cloak, you can fly into an enemy system and cloak, annoying them in local ... no counter. I think of the fact that I'm missing a useful high-slot a sufficient detriment, but not everyone shares the same views.
I guess it would be slightly balancing that, if you are cloaked, you can't communicate over local and whatnot. But that wouldn't stop people from transmitting data using TS, so even that is kinda bunk.
"The greatest offense is no defense."
|
Alora Venoda
GalTech Giant Space Amoeba
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:09:00 -
[5]
maybe they were referring to how you cant cloak if you are enlisted in FW and are in enemy hi-sec space, because the NPC navy ships can still see you. ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless.
Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application. |
CrayC
Gallente CrayC Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:10:00 -
[6]
If you get nothing but a statement, no reasons or anything, expect it to be pure BS.
But if you believe that kind of things.......... Ibis is overpowered!
|
Artemis Rose
Eleckrostatik
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:11:00 -
[7]
If you are in FW, you can't cloak in enemy space.
The majority of cloaking whines comes for 0.0 residents that either have cloaking ratters everywhere, or reds AFK-cloaking in their systems. This is mainly because you can not find them in any way (unless you manage to warp thru them, but if they picked a good safespot, you'll never find them)
We all know a cloaked, AFK ship is scary business. __________________________________________________
Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine. WTB Purple Nerf Bat. |
Alora Venoda
GalTech Giant Space Amoeba
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:12:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ruze Both broken and overpowered at the same time. You can't go within 2km of any object, and there are plenty of times when I come upon something real small that wasn't on my overview. Not sure if that's broken, per se, but it is annoying.
In the same breath, there's no way to find a cloaked ship. You can go afk cloak, you can fly into an enemy system and cloak, annoying them in local ... no counter. I think of the fact that I'm missing a useful high-slot a sufficient detriment, but not everyone shares the same views.
I guess it would be slightly balancing that, if you are cloaked, you can't communicate over local and whatnot. But that wouldn't stop people from transmitting data using TS, so even that is kinda bunk.
this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them. ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless.
Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application. |
Ashlee Darksky
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:15:00 -
[9]
Whats wrong with AFK cloaking? - It's like playing hide and seek, but forgetting to tell anyone that you're hiding --- I see fail everywhere, and it's like they don't even know they're failing ---
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:16:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Alora Venoda
this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them.
I always say give that ability to destroyers (or make a T2 Destroyer). The primary role of our destroyers in WW2 was to seek out subs so why not give that class of ship an actual reason to use it other than salvaging.
|
|
Jimer Lins
Gallente Pod Six Research
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:18:00 -
[11]
I didn't have any trouble last night. I spend most of my time cloaked. ;)
|
TheG2
Gallente Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:48:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Alora Venoda
this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them.
I always say give that ability to destroyers (or make a T2 Destroyer). The primary role of our destroyers in WW2 was to seek out subs so why not give that class of ship an actual reason to use it other than salvaging.
Actually, thats a pretty good idea, as long as Interdictors can't do the scanning as well as bubble, I'm all for this. Although it should take a while to scan someone out and not be too accurate, otherwise you completely ruin the point of a cloak.
|
Odre Echee
Equestrian Knight Order of Lolicon
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Alora Venoda this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them.
Wait, afk-cloaking? I was meant to go afk?
BUT I WUZ NOT AFK! U CANNAE PROOVE EET! I R JUST VERY PASHUNT! (but I was not afk! You cannot prove it! I [am] just very patient!) ---------------------
Lag in Motsu or other hubs? Can't bear it and want to change? Remember : YOU are part of the problem!
Gave stuff away. Waiting for sub. to run out. |
Lone Gunman
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:52:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I always say give that ability to destroyers (or make a T2 Destroyer). The primary role of our destroyers in WW2 was to seek out subs so why not give that class of ship an actual reason to use it other than salvaging.
I love these real world analogies. Because last time I checked, in the real world you canĘt submerge a Battleship like you can cloak one in EvE. I wouldnĘt think that I would be very enthusiastic about trying to scan down a Raven in a Tech 2 destroyer.
|
Vee Raa
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:54:00 -
[15]
slightly OT, but when i read the thread title i had to think of Cat Stevens
|
Splagada
Minmatar Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:56:00 -
[16]
yeah dude i cant see my f%%#ing ship ------
Tides of Silence |
Crae Matreki
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:19:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Alora Venoda this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them.
Great, that's be just what we need - another nerf to recons!
|
Wild Rho
Amarr Silent Core
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:26:00 -
[18]
Something that always made me laugh was that this super advanced almost infallible cloaking device can be foiled by a corpse drifting too close.
|
Saietor Blackgreen
The First Foundation Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:27:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Crae Matreki
Originally by: Alora Venoda this is the classic afk cloaker issue, which i believe CCP plans to eventually "balance" by adding some means of scanning for them.
Great, that's be just what we need - another nerf to recons!
I dont think it was about CovertOps cloaking ships, just normal cloaks. And even if that would apply to all ships, the idea was to provide _some_ way to find the cloaked ship, even inefficient and slow one, not make it directly scannable.
So that active player could always move and evade the hunters, while AFK spooking of local would become too risky. How is that a nerf to recons, I dont understand.
--- Redesign local/scanner feature - make the place huge, dark and scary again! |
Turiel Demon
Minmatar SHRIKE. Trinity Nova Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:51:00 -
[20]
There is something of a bug with cloaks that you CAN get within 2km of a lot of things and remain cloaked (many gates for instance, you can sit at 1.25 km with no problems at all, many stations (amarr for instance) you can sit outside undock (technically at 0 to the station).
While practicing decloaking maneuvers on sisi I managed to fly a rapier (and 5 drones) within 500m of a stealth bomber (my corpmate) and yet he remained cloaked. ----
nothing to see here, move along nicely now, is that a pink dread out there. aaww you just missed it -eris
|
|
Aerieva
Sky Net Industries Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:58:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Aerieva on 31/07/2008 12:01:22 The police didn't buy the whole 'my pants are cloaked' thing last night at Burger King.
Sometimes I sit directly on a gate cloaked no problems, sometimes I decloak miles away. Been that way forever. I think where the server believes you are isn't always where the client believes you are.
|
Napro
Caldari Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:02:00 -
[22]
cloaking is broken.
CCP goes thru all this drama to nerf invincible nano ships but does nothing about invisible ones?
It's like permanent ECM against every ship
Covert op probes with 1,000km radius to find cloaked ships would be nice... either way something needs to be done. How fair is it to have some red sitting on ur main pipe's gates just doing absolutely nothing? Give it a time limit so he has to warp out then warp back at least then he has to DO something
|
Zephyr Rengate
dearg doom
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:14:00 -
[23]
Yey a whine/question thread not on nanos, back to normal.
|
FlameGlow
Caldari State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:42:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Napro cloaking is broken.
CCP goes thru all this drama to nerf invincible nano ships but does nothing about invisible ones?
It's like permanent ECM against every ship
No, it isn't, at least until you can attack while cloacked
_____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button. |
Gealbhan
Caldari Infernal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:46:00 -
[25]
It's covert ops, deal with it. A cloaked covert frigate ship in a safe spot is not going to wtfomgbbqpwn you or your friends. Their job is gathering intel, their only real defense is their cloak.
Now a cloaked non black ops battleship or something is a totally different story and SHOULD be susceptible to being probed out. You could call it a lack of ship system compatibility with the a cloaking device it was never designed to operate causing "cracks" in the cloak allowing it to be sniffed out by a probe. Covert ops ships wouldn't have this problem as they're designed for it.
That'd take out a lot of the "weekend warrior" cloak users flying non-covert ships with a cloaking module fitted and leave covert ops ships in the role they're meant for.
|
AltBier
Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:37:00 -
[26]
It could be made possible for a scanner or probe to tell you that a cloaked ship is within scan range without giving you 'warp-to' ability. That way you would at least know why you cannot find that person who is in local.
|
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:36:00 -
[27]
On cloaking and scanning cloaked ships down:
I have VERY mixed feeling on this.
I drool over the possibility of scanning down the cloaking ratters in 0.0, and the afk annoyance cloakers.
But, I don't think cloaks should turn into an "endurance game" issue.
By endurance game, imagin you have the gates bubbles, and a cloaked ship in system, and the guy in the cloaked ship has to go to work in RL.
He should NOT be forced to choose between in game death and RL work.
My solution is to allow cloaks to stay active when a player logs off, until the ship unspawns. As with any other ship, if you can find him before he unspawns you can kill him.
This would not lead to very many cloaking ratters and afk cloakers being killed, but it would at least force the afk cloakers and the cloaking ratters to log off, which in and of itself is a small victory.
Again, ANY "balance" of cloaks should NOT force a player to choose between in game death, and going to RL work, or anything like that.
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
Misanth
The Forsakened Companions Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:05:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Misanth on 31/07/2008 15:08:39
Originally by: Sergeant Spot On cloaking and scanning cloaked ships down:
I have VERY mixed feeling on this.
I drool over the possibility of scanning down the cloaking ratters in 0.0, and the afk annoyance cloakers.
But, I don't think cloaks should turn into an "endurance game" issue.
By endurance game, imagin you have the gates bubbles, and a cloaked ship in system, and the guy in the cloaked ship has to go to work in RL.
He should NOT be forced to choose between in game death and RL work.
My solution is to allow cloaks to stay active when a player logs off, until the ship unspawns. As with any other ship, if you can find him before he unspawns you can kill him.
This would not lead to very many cloaking ratters and afk cloakers being killed, but it would at least force the afk cloakers and the cloaking ratters to log off, which in and of itself is a small victory.
Again, ANY "balance" of cloaks should NOT force a player to choose between in game death, and going to RL work, or anything like that.
Something like that. That suggestion would not strike supercaps as bad as well. Those already need enough support fleet in certain situations, it would be pathetic if they'd need to lock down systems while on the move as well. As if all the scouting and parking in friendly systems isn't enough as it is.
No cloak on titans and motherships would make them both alot more defensive, which imho is really pathetic. Those ships should be encouraged to use on the frontline. Not only because they are supercaps, and the chance of killing them a bit more often, but merely because that's where they are put to best use.
Titans jumpbridge, and obviously the DD, motherships logistics/ewar immunity and remote rep capabilities makes these excellent frontline (or rather; just behind frontline) weapons. Invaluable ships in a siege. And yes.. siege.. that means close to hostile territory. Possibly you have no POS' nearby. In homelands you got POS' so this is less of an issue for motherships, while the cloak on titan serve a purpose even there.
Alot of the cloak- or no cloak nerf discuss regular ships vs ratters vs recon/cov op ships, but often forget the supercaps, one of the shiptypes that actually don't "afk-cloak" like ratters/local hostiles. They use the cloak to use their ships offensively. I'm quite sure most of us would rather see the caps fielded like that, rather than purely in the defense.
|
Malcanis
We are Legend
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:07:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Lone Gunman
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I always say give that ability to destroyers (or make a T2 Destroyer). The primary role of our destroyers in WW2 was to seek out subs so why not give that class of ship an actual reason to use it other than salvaging.
I love these real world analogies. Because last time I checked, in the real world you canĘt submerge a Battleship like you can cloak one in EvE. I wouldnĘt think that I would be very enthusiastic about trying to scan down a Raven in a Tech 2 destroyer.
last time I checked a SSBN is a goddamb huge vessel comparable in size to a battleship.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |