EVE Search - Cloaking is fine. Stop trying to get it nerfed.

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Cloaking is fine. Stop trying to get it nerfed.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mighty Ahti Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.27 02:29:00 - [1] K, every few hours there's a thread on nerfing cloakers. There will be more (which is why this is more of a logical rant) and there will be people who say that it's required. But here's what I've learned from reading those threads: Cloaking doesn't require any capacitor to use, it doesn't require a fuel, nor does it require any activity from the player who is cloaking. Cloaking requires that a player (unless in a special ship) cannot move their ship any distance respective to the solar system, they need to stay on a single grid at all times. If they are in a covert ops ship, they can move around but have a minimum 5 second targetting delay once they decloak. They allow a player to remain off the scanner, off overview and stay in local. Effectively scaring the people in local from leaving the station if they don't want to risk their ship. Players believe a nerf of cloaking is required because people come into system and sit at a safe spot cloaked, preventing players from interacting in that system without a risk. Yes, you read that correctly. People don't want a risk while playing the game, at war or in a hostile area. So let's sum this up: Cloaks prevent people from taking any action while they're active. People are complaining that people aren't taking action when they're active. People are whining that cloaking provides a completely safe method of sitting in a system doing nothing. People are johnning that having a hostile in system in a cloaked vessel prevents them from doing what they were doing before that individual entered the system. Here are some other solutions that I can suggest for the people who are whining and complaining. Stop it. If the people are completely inactive while cloaked, why do you care? They are inactive, go do what you want. If the people are sitting there watching you, goto another system where they aren't watching you. What's that? You only have one lvl 4 quality 10+ agent? Boohoo, go get another one? Or better yet, go out anyway and mission under their noses in a gang, they won't bother attacking you solo that way, and as long as you're watching your trusty local you could see any extra incomings. For people in 0.0 who dislike their ratters safing and cloaking, why don't you just stick your own cloaker in the system and prevent him from getting anything done? It works both ways.
Strill	Posted - 2008.08.27 03:01:00 - [2] Edited by: Strill on 27/08/2008 03:01:43 Quote: They allow a player to remain off the scanner, off overview and stay in local. Effectively scaring the people in local from leaving the station if they don't want to risk their ship. Players believe a nerf of cloaking is required because people come into system and sit at a safe spot cloaked, preventing players from interacting in that system without a risk. Yes, you read that correctly. People don't want a risk while playing the game, at war or in a hostile area. No, the cloaker's presence makes the risks outweigh the rewards. You're not making any sense. You expect people to risk hundreds of millions of isk in their ship for some ore or mission/rat loot? You'd have to be stupid to do that. Originally by: Mighty Ahti If the people are completely inactive while cloaked, why do you care? They are inactive, go do what you want. If the people are sitting there watching you, goto another system where they aren't watching you. What's that? You only have one lvl 4 quality 10+ agent? Boohoo, go get another one? Or better yet, go out anyway and mission under their noses in a gang, they won't bother attacking you solo that way, and as long as you're watching your trusty local you could see any extra incomings. Why should people be forced to make all these compromises just because one guy decided to camp out in a system cloaked? You've made my point for me. Quote: For people in 0.0 who dislike their ratters safing and cloaking, why don't you just stick your own cloaker in the system and prevent him from getting anything done? It works both ways. Because I don't care about how inconvenienced he is, I just want to go on with what I'm doing. Needing to blow him up to do that is just a technicality.
Inara Subaka Caldari the united	Posted - 2008.08.27 06:09:00 - [3] One of the few threads I can honestly say: /signed
Anig Browl Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.27 06:38:00 - [4] Originally by: Strill No, the cloaker's presence makes the risks outweigh the rewards. You're not making any sense. You expect people to risk hundreds of millions of isk in their ship for some ore or mission/rat loot? You'd have to be stupid to do that. Oh boo hoo. I cloak regularly...in my t1 hauler. Theoretically I could be in my battleship getting ready to do you harm, but like I'm going to risk crippling a high-end ship by being unable to target/lock for many seconds after I expose myself. Grow a spine already, just watch your overview carefully. While a covert ship like a stealth bomber can do some harsh damage, they are resistible and not very strong if you counter-attack. If you are mining then align and cut your speed to 0, boosting your speed for warp if someone decloaks is a lot faster than the actual alignment itself. You can probably be gone while they are trying to lock you.
Mighty Ahti Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.27 09:29:00 - [5] Edited by: Mighty Ahti on 27/08/2008 09:32:23 Originally by: Strill No, the cloaker's presence makes the risks outweigh the rewards. You're not making any sense. You expect people to risk hundreds of millions of isk in their ship for some ore or mission/rat loot? You'd have to be stupid to do that. Isn't that what eve is about? Tilting odds in your favour? And in high sec there is ALWAYS a risk, just because someone has a cloaker in system doesn't mean you can't move over one system to prevent them from causing a problem. And as I said, it's not like they lock you instantly (and stealth bombers cannot warp cloaked), stay aligned in a mission like you should anyway, and warp the hell out if/when they uncloak. In short, you're risking that hundreds of millions of isk each time you go out missioning. Even without a hostile entity in system. It's just another risk that you can avoid. Originally by: Strill Why should people be forced to make all these compromises just because one guy decided to camp out in a system cloaked? You've made my point for me. How have I made your point. By your perspective you're saying that anyone trying to get by a dictor camp in 0.0 should be able to simply because one guy decided to sit on a gate and spew bubbles out whenever someone jumps in. One person SHOULD be able to disrupt the isk making of people if they only have one system in which they do it. Originally by: Strill Because I don't care about how inconvenienced he is, I just want to go on with what I'm doing. Needing to blow him up to do that is just a technicality. So this is a "Me, and not them" situation right? You want this because you're inconvenienced by having them in local and yet you're too lazy to take 5 minute steps around it? Go find more ways to make isk than simply running missions each day. Make an alt. Do something other than complain that you can't make money because someone is taking the time to disrupt you from doing so. Originally by: Anig Browl If you are mining then align and cut your speed to 0, boosting your speed for warp if someone decloaks is a lot faster than the actual alignment itself. You can probably be gone while they are trying to lock you. Having your speed at 0 means it doesn't matter which direction you're facing. You will align the same speed. However, making sure you have a clear path to your exit point is a good idea.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:03:00 - [6] The nerf is coming! Nano-***gotry now, cloaks later. Enjoy immunity while you can.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:09:00 - [7] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 10:15:24 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass The nerf is coming! Nano-**gotry now, cloaks later. Enjoy immunity while you can. OMG another moron who wants eve to be set to rtard level.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:17:00 - [8] Naw, I'd just like to see it as a real multiplayer game. Nano's and cloaks pander to the solo play styles of people who like immunity when they choose.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:27:00 - [9] Originally by: Strill No, the cloaker's presence makes the risks outweigh the rewards. You're not making any sense. You expect people to risk hundreds of millions of isk in their ship for some ore or mission/rat loot? You'd have to be stupid to do that. 0.0 = risk, if you want to reduce that risk you need to be in a gang so you can defend each other. Originally by: Strill Why should people be forced to make all these compromises just because one guy decided to camp out in a system cloaked?. Because its 0.0 and 0.0 gives no free rides to anybody, if the cloaker is AFK he is no threat if he is not he can just as easily bounce around making new safe spots. Either way he will disrupt disorganized carebears while organized carebears will be able to ignore him. In fact bouncing safes will not let you know when he is attacking as he will always be on your scanner while a cloaker will just apper and so give you at least a little warning. Originally by: Strill Because I don't care about how inconvenienced he is, I just want to go on with what I'm doing. Exactly, your only interested in making your 0.0 life easy and safe.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:30:00 - [10] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 10:32:31 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Naw, I'd just like to see it as a real multiplayer game. Nano's and cloaks pander to the solo play styles of people who like immunity when they choose. NANO is best used and normally used in gangs plus it is not immune and cloaking in hostile systems forces ppl to be in organized gangs to defend themselves (and makes them invulnerable as well while the cloaker is cloaked). So unless your lying you should support both.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:48:00 - [11] I'd glad nano's are gettin nerfed. The only counter to nano (solo or gang) is more nano. If you don't like the fight, turn on your MWD and fly away. Immunity. Cloaking will get nerfed. There is no counter for cloaking. Whether it's a raven ratting in 0.0, or one person trying to intimidate/disrupt/spy on a rival corp or alliance, they are immune to everything.
Acidictadpole ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:52:00 - [12] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I'd glad nano's are gettin nerfed. The only counter to nano (solo or gang) is more nano. If you don't like the fight, turn on your MWD and fly away. Immunity. Cloaking will get nerfed. There is no counter for cloaking. Whether it's a raven ratting in 0.0, or one person trying to intimidate/disrupt/spy on a rival corp or alliance, they are immune to everything. Thing is: You can activate weapons with your MWD going. You can't do anything while you're cloaked. It's fine. Don't get scammed
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:00:00 - [13] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:03:35 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I'd glad nano's are gettin nerfed. The only counter to nano (solo or gang) is more nano. If you don't like the fight, turn on your MWD and fly away. Immunity. The counter to NANO is not more NANO its a varied well balanced and well led team of varied ship types and fittings working well together. Not engaging in the first place = immunity. Sitting in a pos = immunity. Staying docked = immunity. Station hugging and docking = immunity. Gate hugging and jumping = immunity. Hugging pos bubble and entering = immunity. Range+staying aligned and warping if summat comes close = immunity. ect ect ect..... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Cloaking will get nerfed. There is no counter for cloaking. Whether it's a raven ratting in 0.0, or one person trying to intimidate/disrupt/spy on a rival corp or alliance, they are immune to everything. 1. Cloaking is a counter its a counter to probes and getting scanned out. 2. The drawback to using the counter to probes and scanning (cloaking) is being able to effect nothing in your environment until you uncloak, and even them have a huge delay before you can lock or interact. 3. Spies do not need to use cloaks they just join with alts, its a much more effective way of gaining intel. 4. If you corp/alliance can be intimidated or disrupted by a cloaker i suggest you swap to one that does not suck.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:03:00 - [14] Originally by: Acidictadpole Thing is: You can activate weapons with your MWD going. You can't do anything while you're cloaked. It's fine. You don't have to activate your weapons while cloaked. You wait until combat favors you, then drop cloak to activate your weapons. You choose when to attack, and no one can ever force you to engage or leave or anything else. Cloaking is complete invunerability.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:09:00 - [15] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:14:50 Originally by: Torothanax You don't have to activate your weapons while cloaked. Good cos you cannot do it any way or warp or move at any reasonable speed or lock....... Originally by: Torothanax You wait until combat favors you, then drop cloak to activate your weapons. You need to lock the target first and there is a huge locking delay penalty. Originally by: Torothanax You choose when to attack, and no one can ever force you to engage or leave or anything else. A lot like being docked or in a pos or bouncing around safe spots......... Originally by: Torothanax Cloaking is complete invulnerability. To both the cloaker and the prey until the cloaker drops the claok and then the cloaker becomes very vulnerable because of the locking dely.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:10:00 - [16] Why be more honest not call this thread: WWWAAAAA I WANNA MINE AND RAT IN 0.0 WITHOUT BEING ORGANIZED OR IN A GANG WAAAAAAAAAAA.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:22:00 - [17] Originally by: marakor The counter to NANO is not more NANO its a varied well balanced and well led team of varied ship types and fittings working well together. A single nano ship takes a better nano to kill OR a combination of 2 or more ships to kill. Rapier a bubble and somthing to do damage. A falcon an interceptor and a command ship to give speed bonuses. Or any number of other combinations of at least 2 ships. One ship should not need several to beat it. Nano gangs are even worse. This is the basis of blob warfare. Nano's then have 2 counters. Nano and blob. They rightfully deserve the nerf bat. Thier prevelence just backs this. Originally by: marakor Not engaging in the first place = immunity. Sitting in a pos = immunity. Staying docked = immunity. Station hugging and docking = immunity. Gate hugging and jumping = immunity. Hugging pos bubble and entering = immunity. Range+staying aligned and warping if summat comes close = immunity. ect ect ect..... Station hide and seek is about the only other immunity. Well hiding in high as part of an npc corp is pretty close too. POS's can be destroyed so they have a counter. De-agressing and passing through a gate is lamesauce, but it's a far cry from immunity. I'd make the timer for docking and jumping 5 minutes if it was up to me. Originally by: marakor 1. Cloaking is a counter its a counter to probes and getting scanned out. Yer absolutely right. Cloaking is the counter to everything.
Mostly Amazing Gallente Mostly Amazing Corp	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:26:00 - [18] Cloaking does need a fix. I can wake up, login to eve, fly to a hostile system with three accounts flying pvp ships and cloak. Then i can leave my comp on all day and come back hours later still alive and safe. While doing that 100 hostiles were unable to act on my presence and had to choose between not doing any mining, ratting, exploration etc. at all or do it anyways and risk getting jumped. Quote: If the people are completely inactive while cloaked, why do you care? Because you don't know if they are inactive. If you knew that there wouldn't be a problem. Quote: If the people are sitting there watching you, goto another system where they aren't watching you. People shouldn't have to move in their own systems because of one cloaker which they can't touch. Quote: For people in 0.0 who dislike their ratters safing and cloaking, why don't you just stick your own cloaker in the system and prevent him from getting anything done? It works both ways. It's not about being able to counter him. It's about how cloakers can waste other people's time so much by moving/arranging protection etc. while the cloaker himself isn't even playing the game. -------------- I R Not Completely Amazing, But I R Mostly Amazing
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:29:00 - [19] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:38:09 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass A single SNIPER ship takes a better SNIPER to kill OR a combination of 2 or more ships to kill. FAST TACKLER and something to do damage. One ship should not need several to beat it. SNIPER gangs are even worse. This is the basis of blob warfare. SNIPERS then have 2 counters. SNIPER and blob. They rightfully deserve the nerf bat. Thier prevalence just backs this. FIXED. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Station hide and seek is immunity. POS's can be destroyed unless they have stront in and then you need to wait days if theirs enough.. De-agressing and passing through a gate or docking is THE MOST COMMON FORM OF IMMUNITY USED Originally by: marakor 1. Cloaking is a counter its a counter to probes and getting scanned out. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Yer absolutely right. Cloaking is the counter to everything while also countering everything on the ship it is fitted to, and so its perfectly balanced. AAAAND fixed.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:29:00 - [20] Originally by: marakor Why be more honest not call this thread: WWWAAAAA I WANNA MINE AND RAT IN 0.0 WITHOUT BEING ORGANIZED OR IN A GANG WAAAAAAAAAAA. I think that's the end of rational discusion. I'm not even sure what your point is other then you are afraid to play the game without your cloak.
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:30:00 - [21] Dude.. Grow up. Cloaks make people uneasy, but they are part of the game and there are way around it. I do think however there should be a probe type that can be used to scan a grid, and it shows up on overview (like a cyno) so if the cloaker is active he can simply leave grid/move out of its scan range.. If he is afk..then he is dumb and will die.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:33:00 - [22] Originally by: Torothanax Originally by: marakor Why be more honest not call this thread: WWWAAAAA I WANNA MINE AND RAT IN 0.0 WITHOUT BEING ORGANIZED OR IN A GANG WAAAAAAAAAAA. I think that's the end of rational discusion. I'm not even sure what your point is other then you are afraid to play the game without your cloak. How about you rational your self into a organized corp or alliance and get into gangs when you rat or mine in 0.0, instead of crying to ccp to make eve be played in easy mode.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:37:00 - [23] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:38:45 Originally by: Mostly Amazing While doing that 100 hostiles were unable to act on my presence and had to choose between not doing any mining, ratting, exploration etc. at all or do it anyways and risk getting jumped. 100 hostiles all unable to work together and form gangs to rat and mine because of a couple of cloakers. You and the other 99 are pathetic if that is true, and if its not your still pathetic for even trying to make ppl believe it.
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:49:00 - [24] Originally by: marakor Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:38:45 Originally by: Mostly Amazing While doing that 100 hostiles were unable to act on my presence and had to choose between not doing any mining, ratting, exploration etc. at all or do it anyways and risk getting jumped. 100 hostiles all unable to work together and form gangs to rat and mine because of a couple of cloakers. You and the other 99 are pathetic if that is true, and if its not your still pathetic for even trying to make ppl believe it. Isn't it usually 1 ship losing horribly to the 100 ships Camping the Stargate? I'd absolutely LOVE to see ^ this ^ result when a CovOps enters the system and makes it past the Campers. "OMG!!1! He made it out! He's gone off somewhere and cloaked! Quick, retreat to the station and don't come out until he's left!!!1!one!1" --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
Mostly Amazing Gallente Mostly Amazing Corp	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:53:00 - [25] Originally by: marakor Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 11:38:45 Originally by: Mostly Amazing While doing that 100 hostiles were unable to act on my presence and had to choose between not doing any mining, ratting, exploration etc. at all or do it anyways and risk getting jumped. 100 hostiles all unable to work together and form gangs to rat and mine because of a couple of cloakers. You and the other 99 are pathetic if that is true, and if its not your still pathetic for even trying to make ppl believe it. That is exactly the point, 100 hostiles have to gang up and patrol constantly because of a single a cloaker. One person shouldn't be able to effect the game of 100 people by not even playing the game. -------------- I R Not Completely Amazing, But I R Mostly Amazing
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 11:57:00 - [26] Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 27/08/2008 11:57:30 Originally by: marakor A single SNIPER ship takes a better SNIPER to kill Snipers need a tackler. Send a covert ops in to tackle, warp in on top of them. 2 vs 2. Close range beats sniper in straight up dps. If the sniper has a cloak, yer **ed. Originally by:** marakor POS's can be destroyed unless they have stront in and then you need to wait days if theirs enough.. 24 hours is the max re-enforced possible. Then they have to go in and recharge the shields and refuel it. Working as intended. People can't play 24/7. Originally by: marakor De-agressing and passing through a gate is THE MOST COMMON FORM OF IMMUNITY USED Have someone one each side of the gate. Der. Learn 2 gate camp. Originally by: marakor Yer absolutely right. Cloaking is the counter to everything while also countering the ship it is fitted to so perfectly balanced. Say what? Speaky engrish? Anyone who uses a cloak is immune to everything. Period. Solo ratters. Solo gankers. Scouts. PVPers. Carebears. ISK farmer. Cap pilots. ******s. Yer mom. Whoever. A cloak is the ultimate "I never lose" button. saying a ship that uses a cloak can't attack is asinine. "The lock time is too long"! Most aggressors who use a cloak, are in a stealth bomber or a recon. Stealth bombers have ZERO decloaking lock dealy. Recons use a Cov ops cloak that has a 5 second delay. Get the cloak skill to 4 and it's a 3 sec delay. Level 5 is a 2.5 second delay. Recons warp cloaked. So do Cov ops. Stealth bomber get a movement speed bonus while cloaked. Anyone else using a cloak is trying to avoid pvp. All are immune when to EVERYTHING when they want to be. A gate camp is the only thing you have to even remotely worry about. How can anyone say that an in game mechanic that lets a player completely avoid combat is not broken?
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:06:00 - [27] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Most aggressors who use a cloak, are in a stealth bomber or a recon. Both of which have pretty paper thin armor, right? So you get hit by a few missiles, and YOUR BUDDY BESIDE YOU returns fire and kills them. But wait... you want to SOLO 0.0 don't you? So you want combat to play fair for you all by your lonesome. Quote: How can anyone say that an in game mechanic that lets a player completely avoid combat is not broken? But... I thought you said you were getting ganked constantly by those nasty Stealths? Now they're avoiding combat... while killing you... at the same time? And who's to say that avoiding combat is a bad thing, except the players who crave their daily dose of blood and carnage. If someone is hiding in a distant corner of the system... THEY AREN'T A THREAT. If someone is flying a cloaked BS... THEY AREN'T A THREAT. They could become a threat, after they decloak and get over their delay. If someone is flying a cloaked Stealth... they ARE a threat, for as long as their armor stays in place. So travel with friends, and when they show up (if they're stupid enough to decloak in front of an organized group) then you all unload in their direction and Salvage the wreck. Sounds to me... like all the complaints... are about how 0.0 space is just TOO HARD to survive in... Gee, never would have imagined --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:31:00 - [28] Originally by: marakor NANO needs to be tackled so uncloak a rapier (or nuet ship) near them lock, web/nuet, point, dmg, kill NANO's 1 vs 1. Vaga beat raipier one on one, so you lose. And when does a nano ever sit still for a cloaker to decloak next to it? You lose again. Nano's are a gettin nerfed as we speak so it's moot anyway. Lets move on. Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass 24 hours is the max re-enforced possible. Then they have to go in and recharge the shields and refuel it. Working as intended. People can't play 24/7. That applies to both sides so stalemate and stale mate = immunity. Stalemate is not immunity. It won't be stale mate for long anyway. Whoever shows up with the most ships as a POS come out of re-enforced, wins. You lose again. Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Have someone one each side of the gate. Der. Learn 2 gate camp. HMMMM..so now you need ppl on both sides of the gate to deal with one jumper???...i thought needing a gang for one ship was one of the reasons you disliked NANO. This is the way gate camps work. What did you just prove? That deagressing and jumping is broken? I already stated that. At least he's tanked and not goin anywhere if you have both sides camped. You kill him eventually. A nano would just MWD off and leave. Originally by: marakor "Solo ratters. Solo gankers. Scouts. PVPers. Carebears. ISK farmer. Cap pilots. ****s. Yer mom. Whoever" are all invulnerable from and to a cloaker while a cloaker is cloaked** A cloaker needs to uncloak to kill and be uncloaked to be killed and so balance is achieved already as his prey are as invulnerable to him while he is cloaked as he is to them while he is cloaked.... Can you make that any more convoluted? It doesn't matter if a cloaker has to decloak to kill anything. While he's cloaked he's immune to everything. IE broken. Nano's have to close in and slow down to engage. Utill then, they are immune as well. That's why they get the bat now.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:34:00 - [29] Edited by: Torothanax on 27/08/2008 12:36:23
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:41:00 - [30] Originally by: marakor Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 12:22:08 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I've said in every one of my posts is that cloaks offer complete immunity to anyone who uses them WHILE THE CLOAK IS ACTIVATED.. But i conveniently ignore the fact that WHILE THE CLOAK IS ACTIVATED everybody is immune to the cloaker..... fixed. Yer soooooo very clever. You can take my posts and rewrite them as mumbo jumbo I never said. Learn to debate
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:44:00 - [31] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Vaga beat raipier one on one, so you lose. And when does a nano ever sit still for a cloaker to decloak next to it?. 1. A vaga will not get within 20-23km of a good rapier pilot in a 1 v 1 fight so how is it gonna hit it to kill it?..your such a nub at pvp its almost painful. 2. What aligned sniper is gonna not warp off when a ship uncloaks or lands near it?. You fail at pvp and have no clue stop posting until you do. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Stalemate is not immunity. It won't be stale mate for long anyway. Whoever shows up with the most ships as a POS come out of re-enforced, wins. So pos hugging causes blobs....im sure you listed causing blobs as a reason to nerf NANO..... Fail any harder and you will become legend. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass At least he's tanked and not goin anywhere if you have both sides camped. You kill him eventually. A nano would just MWD off and leave. If you can have tackle and dps in your gate camp i can have webbers and nuets in mine so the NANO dies..... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Can you make that any more convoluted? It doesn't matter if a cloaker has to decloak to kill anything. While he's cloaked he's immune to everything. IE broken. Can you not see simple BALANCE, While a cloaker is cloaked he is immune to everything but while he is cloaked EVERTHING is immune to him...perfect balance. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Nano's have to close in and slow down to engage. Utill then, they are immune as well. That's why they get the bat now. NANO forces ppl to tackjle to kill instead of using sheer dps and alpha strike so the promote and force skillful play in piloting team work and fitting styles, that is why they should not be nerfed.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:48:00 - [32] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I've said in every one of my posts is that cloaks offer complete immunity to anyone who uses them WHILE THE CLOAK IS ACTIVATED.. But i conveniently ignore the fact that WHILE THE CLOAK IS ACTIVATED everybody is immune to the cloaker..... fixed. Yer soooooo very clever. You can take my posts and rewrite them as mumbo jumbo I never said. Learn to debate MUMBO JUMBO????. Can a cloaker be killed or even locked while cloaked...NO. Can a cloaker kill or even lock while cloaked......NO. HOW IS THAT NOT A PERFECTLY BALANCED MODULE????.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 12:56:00 - [33] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Stalemate is not immunity. It won't be stale mate for long anyway. Whoever shows up with the most ships as a POS come out of re-enforced, wins. Originally by: marakor So pos hugging causes blobs....im sure you listed causing blobs as a reason to nerf NANO..... Fail any harder and you will become legend. Sov warfare is being reworked to move away from pos's, blobs are bad. Originally by: marakor If you can have tackle and dps in your gate camp i can have webbers and nuets in mine so the NANO dies..... A nano will be out of range or back through the gate before your webbers even lock him. The nerf should fix this. Originally by: marakor Can you not see simple BALANCE, While a cloaker is cloaked he is immune to everything but while he is cloaked EVERTHING is immune to him...perfect balance. Good, lets all be immune to each other and never pvp again. Originally by: marakor NANO forces ppl to tackjle to kill instead of using sheer dps and alpha strike so the promote and force skillful play in piloting team work and fitting styles, that is why they should not be nerfed. Nano's are almost impossible to tackle, the nerf should fix this. It's not like nanoships are going away, they are just bein fixed. Enough about nano's. No one said cloaks should be taken out of the game either. All most reasonable players want is for the complete immunity to be removed. As overpowered as they are right now, it's only a mater of time before they get the bat. The more people abuse cloaks right now, the worse the nerf will be.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:06:00 - [34] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 13:13:53 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass A nano will be out of range or back through the gate before your webbers even lock him. The nerf should fix this. Most ships even BS can make it back to a gate not just NANO (and we have ppl on both sides with webs...remember), and NANO cannot out run the lock unless its a pimped out 15-30kms ship and not only are they uber rare but also nobody i have seen has a problem nerfing them as long as the slower fits are unaffected. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Good, lets all be immune to each other and never pvp again. Oh ho somebody lost the logical argument so has gone for the exaggerated illogical response.... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Nano's are almost impossible to tackle, the nerf should fix this. NANO are hard to tackle if you are not in a well balanced, well led and skilled team, the nerf if it comes about will remove the need to tackle and the team work and skill it involved to do so.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:19:00 - [35] I said I'm done talking about nano*gotry. Originally by:** marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Good, lets all be immune to each other and never pvp again. Oh ho somebody lost the logical argument so has gone for the exaggerated illogical response.... How many times do I have to repeat myself? Attacker or defender, cloak and you are completely and forever immune. What's illogical about that?
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:30:00 - [36] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 13:33:02 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I said I'm done talking about nano*gotry. Good ppl should know when to stfu if they do not know what they are talking abouit. Originally by:** Fullmetal Jackass Good, lets all be immune to each other and never pvp again. Originally by: marakor Oh ho somebody lost the logical argument so has gone for the exaggerated illogical response.... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass How many times do I have to repeat myself? Attacker or defender, cloak and you are completely and forever immune. What's illogical about that? "Never to pvp again"....lol yea real mature and logical dude...
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:37:00 - [37] You seem to have taken the "If I talk more, I'm right" aproach. At this point you are just trolling. It really doesn't matter what either of us thinks. CCP will or won't nerf cloaks. My money's on the nerf. Enjoy it while it lasts.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:41:00 - [38] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass You seem to have taken the "If I talk more, I'm right" aproach. At this point you are just trolling. It really doesn't matter what either of us thinks. CCP will or won't nerf cloaks. My money's on the nerf. Enjoy it while it lasts. I will and do but when or if it goes ppl like you will look for or need something else to find to blame your losses and incompetence on while me and ppl like me will just go on killing you.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:44:00 - [39] My God people! Another of these thread ... Im beginning to think that the horrible plan that, was presented on BRUCE forums after [UDIE] visit, to spam forums about cloaking untill it gets nerfed has actually been executed. Does something need to be done? -> YES Are the cloaking devices the actual problem? -> NO Does the actual problem revolve around abuse of local chat? -> YES Now go buy a spine (since most of you are obviously incapable to growin one) and learn something about game play
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:47:00 - [40] There you go putting words in my mouth again. I've never been killed by a cloaking ship. I have however, wasted my time looking and scanning for cloaked ships. I've also used cloaks to save my ass and waste other people's time when I was ratting. But if you feel the need to imagine excuses I never made, in order to feel better, I'll leave you to it.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.27 13:49:00 - [41] Originally by: Mighty Ahti Post of FAIL Well you can¦t even handle the risk of posting with a Main on Internet Spaceship Games eh? At the moment people go AFK in hostile space and are unscannable, unpredictable and unkillable(till they deactivate the cloak for a reason ) EVE is ballanced. Owait, it is not, it is broken. Give people a way to scan down the afk cloakers, so they can not longer do it afk and everybody is happy. Any non AKF player can avoid to get caugt by probes on a SS I see not even one valid reason a afk player should be save if not docked, at a pos or simply logged out of the game. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Manxome NOXX	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:02:00 - [42] A cloaker needs to uncloak to kill and be uncloaked to be killed and so balance is achieved already as his prey are as invulnerable to him while he is cloaked as he is to them while he is cloaked.... By jove...he may just have gotten the point. Jeeze. Erm...cloaked = both players immune to each other. And...un-cloaked = both players are NOT immune to each other. Everything else is just unorganised, spineless 0.0 wannabes crying 'cos they don't have the playground all to themselves. PS. If you camp a gate properly you can almost ensure that NO cloaked ships pass through. I am sooo bored of this topic. Please get over it. Or the puppy gets it! NOXx
Harshe NEXUS Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:07:00 - [43] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I have however, wasted my time looking and scanning for cloaked ships. Erm...I don't think you can scan them or look for them. So that was a REAL waste of time lol.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:09:00 - [44] The guy with the cloak is the only one immune. Everyone else has to wait until he decloaks to engage.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:10:00 - [45] Here is what amuses me most: A cloaker cannot be scanned until he uncloaks and if he does a solo ratter is in trouble, so organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the cloaker. Now if the hostile ship was docked instead he can still undock instead of uncloak and the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the cloaker. A ship bounces around making new safe spots instead of cloaking and constantly showing up on the carebears scan, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. A ship logs off in a hostile system instead of cloaking and he periodically logs on to catch carebears ratting/mining, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. A ship sits logged on in a POS instead of cloaking, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. Now i understand that a couple of these examples like the POS (can be blobbed and destroyed) or the bouncing around SS shows he is active but the organization is still a constant with these and the others. The problem is not cloaks its ppls lazy attitude towards carebearing and unwillingness to work as a team and it always will be until they change.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:10:00 - [46] Originally by: Harshe NEXUS Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I have however, wasted my time looking and scanning for cloaked ships. Erm...I don't think you can scan them or look for them. So that was a REAL waste of time lol. How do you know if they are cloaked or not if you don't scan for them?
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:11:00 - [47] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 14:13:53 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass The guy with the cloak is the only one immune. So a cloaker can engage while cloaked???????. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass How do you know if they are cloaked or not if you don't scan for them? WOW you had to open your scanner and click a button a couple of times in a couple of different places.......it must have been terrible for you..
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:16:00 - [48] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: Harshe NEXUS Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I have however, wasted my time looking and scanning for cloaked ships. Erm...I don't think you can scan them or look for them. So that was a REAL waste of time lol. How do you know if they are cloaked or not if you don't scan for them? Umm, you can see them? ...maybe... If its not on your grid then its not attacking you is it? On other news: this just shows how abused local chat really is these days. If a player belives that they shouldnt even need to use scanner to find out whats in system, then something is terribly wrong with game design.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:25:00 - [49] Originally by: marakor A cloaker cannot be scanned until he uncloaks and if he does a solo ratter is in trouble, so organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the cloaker. true Originally by: marakor Now if the hostile ship was docked instead he can still undock instead of uncloak and the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the cloaker. true, but in most 0.0 your alliance controls the outposts. Hostiles can't dock. Originally by: marakor A ship bounces around making new safe spots instead of cloaking and constantly showing up on the carebears scan, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. True, BUT at least the defenders have a chance to catch said bouncing ship, or run him off when the player gets tired of bouncing. Both parties are active. Originally by: marakor A ship logs off in a hostile system instead of cloaking and he periodically logs on to catch carebears ratting/mining, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. True, but more an annoyance then anything else. Hauling and ratting are breifly interupted from time to, but players in non combat ships can get safe. Most people get bored of loggin in and out. Originally by: marakor A ship sits logged on in a POS instead of cloaking, the same organization is needed to defend the ratter/miner and kill the hostile ship. False. Never happen. If you have a pos up in a system you either own it or are disputing ownership. No one but the incredably stupid would stick around in a non combat ship. Originally by: marakor Now i understand that a couple of these examples like the POS (can be blobbed and destroyed) or the bouncing around SS shows he is active but the organization is still a constant with these and the others. The problem is not cloaks its ppls lazy attitude towards carebearing and unwillingness to work as a team and it always will be until they change. The problem is it wastes peoples time with little effort from the agressor. There is no way to tell if a ship is cloaked or out of range of a scan. All you know is that the player is in system somewhere. Many times you won't even know what ships he's in. No one likes to guard haulers, noob, ratter, or mining ops when they don't even know if there is a real threat. They'd rather be out making money, or pvping for real. There is no fun or isk in guard duty.
Manxome NOXX	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:26:00 - [50] This is great. I love it when people argue against themselves, or tell the world that their allaince is yella and disorganized. I am making a note of all you lazy carebears and I am gonna create alts to sit in your systems in a frigate and look all menacing. Ooooh...look out for the unknown...oooh.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:32:00 - [51] Originally by: marakor So a cloaker can engage while cloaked???????. The cloaker engages when he feels like it. Only a moron would drop cloak to fight when he can't win. We've been over this. Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass How do you know if they are cloaked or not if you don't scan for them? WOW you had to open your scanner and click a button a couple of times in a couple of different places.......it must have been terrible for you.. The on board scanner should at least tell a player that a cloaked ship is within scan range. It's not like you can warp to anything you scan with the onboard scanner. Wasted time is wasted time.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:36:00 - [52] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass No one likes to guard haulers, noob, ratter, or mining ops when they don't even know if there is a real threat. They'd rather be out making money, or pvping for real. There is no fun or isk in guard duty. There is no fun in staying afk and i can bet that if the first few times your cloaker uncloaks and tries to kill summat he get popped he will move on to a easier local, and if every place he goes he gets the same organized response and ass kicking he will soon pack up the whole idea and find summat else to do. Its you and ppl like you that allow this sort of thing to go on and work so effectively and instead of easily dealing with it you run to ccp to change the game instead.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 14:58:00 - [53] Originally by: The Djego So the people have to be on guard all the time while the cloaker can be akf? Right click, join gang.... .......well gosh, all that to make cloaking impotent, perhaps a blog and a full set of instructions should be posted some where to help those incapable of such a technical and difficult arrangement. And lets not forget that a properly structured gang setup (cos mining and ratting give you plenty of time to move ppl into place) dishes out some rather juicy bonuses along with the ability to warp to anybody who gets attacked. Win win.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:01:00 - [54] Originally by: Manxome NOXX EVE is a massively MULTIPLAYER Online RPG. K...? That means that people play with each other(oooh-er). To combat afk cloaking = get a life and interact work with your corp m8s. If you think that guarding a miner in 0.0 or flying as wingman in missions or ratting is a waste of time then you should NOT be in a corp, in an allaince or 0.0. This is the way it is. It's dangerous and scary for a reason. You have access to free isk when you mine or rat in 0.0. But there have to be risks, even on your home turf. It is very true though that this is NOT about cloaks. It's about local. Discuss that. The risk in 0.0 is losing your turf. If a hostile ship comes into system, you park your noncombat ships and kill the hostile, or run him off. If you can't secure your local space, you can't really call it yours, or use it for anything can you? There is no way to interact with a cloaked ship unless the pilot of said ship decides to decloak. Complete immunity is bad.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:02:00 - [55] Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 27/08/2008 15:03:33 Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego So the people have to be on guard all the time while the cloaker can be akf? Right click, join gang.... .......well gosh, all that to make cloaking impotent, perhaps a blog and a full set of instructions should be posted some where to help those incapable of such a technical and difficult arrangement. And lets not forget that a properly structured gang setup (cos mining and ratting give you plenty of time to move ppl into place) dishes out some rather juicy bonuses along with the ability to warp to anybody who gets attacked. Win win. Right, cause you know a barge or a hauler lasts all of 30 seconds in combat. Ya gonna have one guard for every non combat ship?
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:04:00 - [56] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass There is little enough pvp in the game. Cloaking is a stall tactic. Actually its a counter to getting probed and blobbed to death. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass It's one more time sink that drives real pvper's nutz. Real pvpers do not give a toss about afk cloakers, disorganized carebears who want 0.0 to be safe and snugly on the other hand do....... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Until there is a proper counter, it will be overpowered, and people will continue to make "nerf" threads. As i have pointed out cloaking is a counter, and these silly threads will never get over a page if it was not for ppl telling the OP and one or two supporters that cloaking is fine its them that have the problem.
Harshe NEXUS Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:05:00 - [57] Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 27/08/2008 14:51:21 So the people have to be on guard all the time while the cloaker can be akf? Ofc he can¦t attack while afk, but he can¦t be attaced to while he is to. But he can decide when to attack, can look at local, "Hm to bussy, will look back in 3-4 hours..." so any defence is useless if the offender have full controll of when and where with all the Intel. Wow...you have just hit the nail on the head. The cloaker can DECIDE when to attack. If he see's you alone, ratting in 0.0 you will be attacked if the stats add up. If EVE was a nice place to live, why insure your ship? If a cloak is not invulnerable (unless you get within 2k (oooh look, a counter to cloaking)) then it is just a module which: a)ruins your ships speed. b)ruins your ships locking ability. c)turns off all your modules. Keep it the way it is. Discuss local. The only reason you know that a HIDDEN CLOAKED INVISIBLE ship is anywhere near you is because the local channel says it is. It is not the cloak, it's local.sigh
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:12:00 - [58] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego So the people have to be on guard all the time while the cloaker can be akf? Right click, join gang.... .......well gosh, all that to make cloaking impotent, perhaps a blog and a full set of instructions should be posted some where to help those incapable of such a technical and difficult arrangement. And lets not forget that a properly structured gang setup (cos mining and ratting give you plenty of time to move ppl into place) dishes out some rather juicy bonuses along with the ability to warp to anybody who gets attacked. Win win. Right, cause you know a barge or a hauler lasts all of 30 seconds in combat. Ya gonna have one guard for every non combat ship? You really are a noob aint ya????? lol you see the cloaker coming on your scanner and are in warp long before he has a chance to land, fire or even lock you, its all a matter of piloting skill and awareness instead of sitting doing nothing but slurping minerals. And yes even the slowest mining barge can get up to warp speed long before a cloaker can get into position to lock it IF he is paying attention and has his ship aligned if not at speed.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:15:00 - [59] Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass There is little enough pvp in the game. Cloaking is a stall tactic. Actually its a counter to getting probed and blobbed to death. It's not a "counter" if you are initiation contact. If you can't stand up to a fight in my system, don't wait for the blob. Oh wait, we can't fight, you have a cloak. Stall tactic. Originally by: marakor Real pvpers do not give a toss about afk cloakers, disorganized carebears who want 0.0 to be safe and snugly on the other hand do....... Real pvper's care about the time they waste looking for ship that may or may not be cloaked. A roaming gang has no way to know who's cloaked and who's not when they enter a system. We've already covered this. Originally by: marakor As i have pointed out cloaking is a counter, and these silly threads will never get over a page if it was not for ppl telling the OP and one or two supporters that cloaking is fine its them that have the problem. Every "counter" should have it's own counter in turn. Right now cloaks are a game of paper and rock with no scissors. There is no counter to immunity.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:23:00 - [60] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 15:25:06 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Real pvper's care about the time they waste looking for ship that may or may not be cloaked. A roaming gang has no way to know who's cloaked and who's not when they enter a system. Real scouts for real pvpers first scan at the gate then they warp to the out gate scanning as they go, if they do not find anything on scan as they cross the system they do not jump around it looking for a solo ship and keeping the entire gang waiting they move on towards the destination looking for other ships and better fights. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Every "counter" should have it's own counter in turn. Right now cloaks are a game of paper and rock with no scissors. There is no counter to immunity. Cloaking is its own counter because it can do nothing but nothing can be done to it while its active it gives immunity to itself and causes immunity for others against itself. By your reckoning for a counter to a counter to a counter it could go on for every as the anti cloak module should need a counter, then that would need one..and on and on....
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:24:00 - [61] Edited by: The Djego on 27/08/2008 15:25:11 Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego So the people have to be on guard all the time while the cloaker can be akf? Right click, join gang.... .......well gosh, all that to make cloaking impotent, perhaps a blog and a full set of instructions should be posted some where to help those incapable of such a technical and difficult arrangement. And lets not forget that a properly structured gang setup (cos mining and ratting give you plenty of time to move ppl into place) dishes out some rather juicy bonuses along with the ability to warp to anybody who gets attacked. Win win. First I thougt you are stupid, not I know you are simply a troll. Why should the cloaker by unscanalbe? It is no problem for people that are not afk, since they get the booring stuff by this to(not only the Targets). Waiting hours for a kill? I realy don¦t think that anyone will continue that Tactic if he have to be no afk all day long. Why should the cloaker be saver than somebody other in the system? Seriously you are in hostile space, you should not be save if someone form up a proper Gang to take you down or take you down solo(since most cloakers use Reacons that can be killed quite easy if you catch them by suprise). Why should a cloaker have the advantage of beeing save even with a gang ready to kill him? Well? No Idea? Dito I don¦t have one to. People will form up gangs and take down the cloakers if they have a chance to find them. Rest of the stuff is boring, waiting for a afk player to attack, I rather camp a gate(what is booring to) or go on a roam, it is not PVP it¦s simply booring stuff. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:29:00 - [62] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 15:30:40 Originally by: The Djego blah blah blah i wannna blob ppl and go back to safely slurping veld solo blah blah Ok how about a timer that a cloaker needs to click every 30 mins or so?..that would stop afk cloaking while keeping active cloaking a viable option against blobbers.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:40:00 - [63] Originally by: marakor You really are a noob aint ya????? lol you see the cloaker coming on your scanner and are in warp long before he has a chance to land, fire or even lock you, its all a matter of piloting skill and awareness instead of sitting doing nothing but slurping minerals. And yes even the slowest mining barge can get up to warp speed long before a cloaker can get into position to lock it IF he is paying attention and has his ship aligned if not at speed. So now you can magicly see cloaked ships on scanner? I want whatever scanner you are using. Barges have to start warp as soon as a hostile enters system. That's a no brainer, you safe spot and wait till the hostile is delt with. Oh wait, you have a cloaked recon. You warp cloaked. We now need at least 3 combat ships, Heavy assualt ship or better, to guard the mining/hauling fleet. One for the haulers, one for the barges and one to scout and watch the gates. Your small quick little op, just turned into a 10 man fleet to be profitable. Major corp or alliance operations aren't a problem. When you've got 20 people working together it's no big deal to get the cover you need. You can't always get that many people together though, and if you like me you hate mining or guard duty. Ratting is way easier. If im solo ratting in my cloak fitted raven, I don't give a rats ass if you show up in your single cloaked ship, as long as I have friendlies near by to warn of the incoming roaving gang. If I don't I'll either move or cloak and wait. I might even log and wait for you to get bored and leave. The problem is when a cloaked ship shows up in a busy system, everything slows WAY down because now everyone not in a HAS or better needs an escort. 2, 3 or more cloakers and the problem gets even worse. A few people causing a lot of trouble for a large group of people because they are compeltely IMMUNE to all forms of attack untill they CHOOSE not to be.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:44:00 - [64] Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 27/08/2008 15:46:33 Originally by: marakor Cloaking is its own counter because it can do nothing but nothing can be done to it while its active it gives immunity to itself and causes immunity for others against itself. By your reckoning for a counter to a counter to a counter it could go on for every as the anti cloak module should need a counter, then that would need one..and on and on.... Trolling. We've already established that only the cloaked ships are immune. A cloak does not make a combat ship into a non combat ship.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:48:00 - [65] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 15:51:23 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass So now you can magicly see cloaked ships on scanner? I want whatever scanner you are using. No i cannot see cloaked ships with the scanner one i use, BUT i can see the ships that uncloak and warp to the belt i would be mining/ratting in on the scanner i use and as soon as i see them on it i warp away.....muppet. And yes the recon can warp cloaked but that is what they are designed for and you wanna nerf the entire recon design so you can solo mine and rat?...go away clown.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:51:00 - [66] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 15:54:26 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass ] Originally by: marakor Cloaking is its own counter because it can do nothing but nothing can be done to it while its active it gives immunity to itself and causes immunity for others against itself. By your reckoning for a counter to a counter to a counter it could go on for every as the anti cloak module should need a counter, then that would need one..and on and on.... Trolling. We've already established that only the cloaked ships are immune. A cloak does not make a combat ship into a non combat ship. We have established nothing of the sort. FACT A CLOAKED SHIP IS HARMLESS TO OTHER SHIPS MAKING THEM IMMUNE TO IT UNTIL IT DROPS ITS CLOAK AND CLOAKED SHIP CANNOT BE HARMED MAKING IT IMMUNE TO THEM (UNLESS A ON GRID DDD IS INVOLVED) UNTIL IT DROPS ITS CLOAK. BALANCE.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 15:54:00 - [67] Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass ] Originally by: marakor Cloaking is its own counter because it can do nothing but nothing can be done to it while its active it gives immunity to itself and causes immunity for others against itself. By your reckoning for a counter to a counter to a counter it could go on for every as the anti cloak module should need a counter, then that would need one..and on and on.... Trolling. We've already established that only the cloaked ships are immune. A cloak does not make a combat ship into a non combat ship. We have established nothing of the sort. FACT A CLOAKED SHIP IS HARMLESS TO OTHER SHIPS MAKING THEM IMMUNE TO IT, AND CANNOT BE HARMED MAKING IT IMMUNE TO THEM (UNLESS A DDD IS INVOLVED) UNTIL IT DROPS ITS CLOAK. BALANCE. FACT: a cloaked ship can attack WHENEVER it wants to. It's completely immune to detection and damage untill it does so.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:24:00 - [68] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor OK OK OK il add "you need to be mining in the exact belt that the cloaker just happens to be camping" to the very long list of things that need to go right for a cloaker to kill a mining barge. So no ship can warp cloaked now? Yer so full of shit. So you wanna nerf recons just so you can slurp veld solo?...stfu loser.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:25:00 - [69] Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass If I stand in front of you, doing nothing, while your eyes are closed, it doesn't make you immune to me. I can punch you in the nose whenever I like. Wtf are you going on about now your utter nutter Yeah that's what I thought. Now yer just completely trolling. Ever argument for cloaks being fine the way they are can be poked full of holes. The Devs aren't stupid. The nerf bat will come.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:26:00 - [70] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 16:28:01 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass If I stand in front of you, doing nothing, while your eyes are closed, it doesn't make you immune to me. I can punch you in the nose whenever I like. Wtf are you going on about now your utter nutter Yeah that's what I thought. Now yer just completely trolling. Ever argument for cloaks being fine the way they are can be poked full of holes. The Devs aren't stupid. The nerf bat will come. BUT THIS: "If I stand in front of you, doing nothing, while your eyes are closed, it doesn't make you immune to me. I can punch you in the nose whenever I like". Is it English or anything resembling how cloaking works..its nonsensical you tard. Am i the cloaker or are you in that silly scenario?.
Caldari 5 Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:27:00 - [71] Cloaking doesn't need to be NERFed it needs to be BUFFED! At the moment we have huge alliances that have spread themselves too thin to properly defend their own Miners/Ratters, the Alliance Navies stand by in a central location waiting for a call to go Bash up the Solo Hunter that gets into their outer limit systems, this leads to the feeling from the Miners that they have no protection. Which is true, they should be mining closer to the core of their Alliance, the Outer-Rim is where the PvP/Navy should be. I believe that cloaked ships should be able to target whilst cloaked. Any sufficiently tanked ship should be able to handle one slavo from a cloaked ship. Any Miner should be toast they are mining outside the core area of the alliance. I would however like to see a larger timer on the re-cloaking of the ship, probably equal to the current de-cloak targeting time, this enables the defenders to target and return fire properly. If a cloaker manages to get into your core systems, they should be causing Havoc, just like any good SAS/Covert Ops should. As for things that NEED a Counter Cloaking is not it, Warp Disruption Bubbles require a Counter, Bubbles should have a warp scramble strength just like the Warp Disrupters/Warp Scramblers. Quite frankly Bubbles are WAY OVERPOWERED.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:31:00 - [72] Originally by: marakor BUT THIS: "If I stand in front of you, doing nothing, while your eyes are closed, it doesn't make you immune to me. I can punch you in the nose whenever I like". is it english or anything resembling how cloaking works its nonsensical you tard. It's a pretty good desctription of how cloaking works right now. Everyone not cloaked is blindfolded to you, untill you take it off by attacking them. They aren't immune to you in any way shape or form. They just can't see you, while you can see them and draw blood whenever, IF ever you please. Now stop wasting my time.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:39:00 - [73] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 16:46:02 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Everyone not cloaked is blindfolded to you, until you take it off by attacking them. Well actually they un-blindfold you before they can attack so you can see them coming. (stupid analogy btw) Cloaking is stealth that disables all offensive and defensive ships systems making it harmless and non harmable (unless ddd) until it drops the cloak. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass They aren't immune to you in any way shape or form. While you are cloaked they are immune to you 100% (as you cannot lock or activate modules) you need to uncloak and be vulnerable to make them vulnerable. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass They just can't see you, while you can see them and draw blood whenever, IF ever you please. If a cloaker chooses to draw blood his invulnerability is gone and unless he is in a flimsy bomber the home team have a large bonus to locking him first in the form of the initial delay and in the scan res penalty. Stop talking crap.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:44:00 - [74] Cloaked ships get to pick when, where, and who they fight, and at what range. If a cloaked ship never attacks, it can never be attacked. It's overpowered. There's no way around that.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:50:00 - [75] Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor OK OK OK il add "you need to be mining in the exact belt that the cloaker just happens to be camping" to the very long list of things that need to go right for a cloaker to kill a mining barge. So no ship can warp cloaked now? Yer so full of shit. So you wanna nerf recons just so you can slurp veld solo?...stfu loser. Quite amusing, every time people are out of arguments the pull up shit like "You are a carebear, you are a noob, you are a loser, <insert random smack here> etc. Seriously stop posting. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:51:00 - [76] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Cloaked ships get to pick when, where, and who they fight, and at what range. Everybody in eve can pick when, where and who they fight and at what range unless they choose to fight ships that are incapable of fighting, like docked ships or cloakers that are both harmless until they uncloak or undock. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass If a cloaked ship never attacks, it can never be attacked. Perfect symmetry and balance.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:53:00 - [77] Originally by: The Djego Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor OK OK OK il add "you need to be mining in the exact belt that the cloaker just happens to be camping" to the very long list of things that need to go right for a cloaker to kill a mining barge. So no ship can warp cloaked now? Yer so full of shit. So you wanna nerf recons just so you can slurp veld solo?...stfu loser. Quite amusing, every time people are out of arguments the pull up shit like "You are a carebear, you are a noob, you are a loser, <insert random smack here> etc. Seriously stop posting. You did read the stupid comment and foul language used in the post i was responding to did'nt you????, or do you have the troll filter that ignores things you agree with???. Hypocrite much???.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 16:59:00 - [78] Originally by: marakor Everybody in eve can pick when, where and who they fight and at what range unless they choose to fight ships that are incapable of fighting, like docked ships or cloakers that are both harmless until they uncloak or undock. Right, so the hauler can just say "yer not allowed to shoot me" to anyone he pleases. And the ratter out in a pve set up raven is completely immune to that roaming gang of heavy assualt ships. You really should read what you type before you post it. Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass If a cloaked ship never attacks, it can never be attacked. Perfect symmetry and balance. Being completely safe no matter where you are (aka immune, which your targets are not) is not balanced. Denial is very unbecoming.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:01:00 - [79] Edited by: The Djego on 27/08/2008 17:02:44 Originally by: marakor You did read the stupid comment and foul language used in the post i was responding to did'nt you????, or do you have the troll filter that ignores things you agree with???. Hypocrite much???. Well you started with the most stupid thing. The ship must be on grid allready. And no, reacons don¦t have to, was a valid counter. So in the end, you fail at trolling, impressive isn¦t it? ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:03:00 - [80] Originally by: marakor You did read the stupid comment and foul language used in the post i was responding to did'nt you????, or do you have the troll filter that ignores things you agree with???. Hypocrite much???. As to the post you were responding to; I just call it like I see it. Yer so full of it, yer eyes are turning brown. Welcome to the land of make believe.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:07:00 - [81] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 17:11:03 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Right, so the hauler can just say "yer not allowed to shoot me" to anyone he pleases. I never said it could unless its docked or cloaked and incapable of causing harm. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass And the ratter out in a pve set up raven is completely immune to that roaming gang of heavy assualt ships. No but he is neither cloaked or docked and he can do harm and fire his guns/launchers. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass I really should read what you type before I post. yup. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Being completely safe no matter where you are (aka immune, which your targets are not) is not balanced. Please link the cloaking system that can fire while cloaked and immune to other ships...no?...thats cos when a cloaker is immune to dmg its targets are immune to it?. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Denial is very unbecoming. Then get over it your repeating the same flawed argument over and over..a cloaked ship is immune to damage and its targets are also immune to it until it uncloaks and in no longer immune..how are you so stupid you cannot understand that????.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:10:00 - [82] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 17:11:20 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor You did read the stupid comment and foul language used in the post i was responding to did'nt you????, or do you have the troll filter that ignores things you agree with???. Hypocrite much???. As to the post you were responding to; I just call it like I see it. Yer so full of it, yer eyes are turning brown. Welcome to the land of make believe. I do like your land of make believe actually...where cloakers can cause harm while claoked...clown
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:12:00 - [83] The nerf bat cometh.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:14:00 - [84] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 17:15:21 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass The nerf bat cometh. I see no bats...well apart from those who say "ships can cause dmg while cloaked" belfries. Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Being completely safe no matter where you are (aka immune, which your targets are not) is not balanced.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:16:00 - [85] Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor You did read the stupid comment and foul language used in the post i was responding to did'nt you????, or do you have the troll filter that ignores things you agree with???. Hypocrite much???. As to the post you were responding to; I just call it like I see it. Yer so full of it, yer eyes are turning brown. Welcome to the land of make believe. I do like your land of make believe actually...where cloakers can cause hard while claoked...clown You are just a troll, that is out of arguments and tryes to coutinue the thread. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.27 17:18:00 - [86] Edited by: marakor on 27/08/2008 17:21:13 Originally by: marakor I do like your land of make believe actually...where cloakers can cause hard while claoked...clown Originally by: The Djego You are just a troll, that is out of arguments and tryes to coutinue the thread. THIS: Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Being completely safe no matter where you are (aka immune, which your targets are not) is not balanced. I wanna cloaker that is immune but can cause dmg to targets it cannot even lock....
Commander BroudMoore Contraband Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:13:00 - [87] Edited by: Commander BroudMoore on 27/08/2008 18:15:56 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 27/08/2008 16:16:58 Originally by: marakor Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Just because your cloaked ship isn't firing on someone, doesn't mean they are immune. ER...thats exactly what it means pal. If I stand in front of you, doing nothing, while your eyes are closed, it doesn't make you immune to me. I can punch you in the nose whenever I like. If you are standing in front of me with your hands and legs bound with the same thing that is covering me eyes (Im not actually stupid enough to move around blind ya know ..) you arent gonna punch anyone untill the bounds are removed... While at the same time I as the blind one, can swing blind shots at you and you can do nothing to defend yourself. so yeah, it actually does make me immune to you, but YOU would be at disadvantage. Now modify last few lines a bit and you can make it tell how cloaking works in game right now.
Eve Goetterdaemmerung	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:21:00 - [88] Edited by: Eve Goetterdaemmerung on 27/08/2008 18:21:26 Correct! Do not change the cloaks! As a POS owner I have to fly to my POSes in lowsec with a frighter from time to time. And for this you need a scout, which is just sitting invisible in 2xy km distance to the gate, checking that there is no pirate at the gate. Besides that I like watching the warfare gangs fighting to death... but only invisible from a distance Eve G.
Strill	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:36:00 - [89] Edited by: Strill on 27/08/2008 18:37:13 Originally by: Mighty Ahti Originally by: Strill Why should people be forced to make all these compromises just because one guy decided to camp out in a system cloaked? You've made my point for me. How have I made your point. By your perspective you're saying that anyone trying to get by a dictor camp in 0.0 should be able to simply because one guy decided to sit on a gate and spew bubbles out whenever someone jumps in. One person SHOULD be able to disrupt the isk making of people if they only have one system in which they do it. I agree. One person should be able to disrupt the isk making of a large group of people, but they should not be able to do it with impunity like they can with a cloak. I would be perfectly fine going out and blasting the cloaker, then getting back to what I was doing, but seeing as how they can keep cloaking as long as they want with no recourse, that's not an option. Therefore, the only way to get around it is to have every single person in the system arrange defenses against him. Originally by: Wrangler Al Dude.. Grow up. Cloaks make people uneasy, but they are part of the game and there are way around it. I do think however there should be a probe type that can be used to scan a grid, and it shows up on overview (like a cyno) so if the cloaker is active he can simply leave grid/move out of its scan range.. If he is afk..then he is dumb and will die. Agreed. A person who's managed to successfuly hide without being seen should be able to keep their hiding spot. A person who's given themselves away and is using the cloak as invulnerability should be vulnerable to attacks.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:44:00 - [90] Originally by: Strill Originally by: Wrangler Al Dude.. Grow up. Cloaks make people uneasy, but they are part of the game and there are way around it. I do think however there should be a probe type that can be used to scan a grid, and it shows up on overview (like a cyno) so if the cloaker is active he can simply leave grid/move out of its scan range.. If he is afk..then he is dumb and will die. Agreed. A person who's managed to successfuly hide without being seen should be able to keep their hiding spot. A person who's given themselves away and is using the cloak as invulnerability should be vulnerable to attacks. Noone should know, the person who hasnt given himself away, is in the system in the first place. And THAT is the broken part. EvE takes Stealth out of stealt-ship and still people are moaning. (means grow up nooblets)
Anig Browl Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:54:00 - [91] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Cloaking will get nerfed. There is no counter for cloaking. Whether it's a raven ratting in 0.0, or one person trying to intimidate/disrupt/spy on a rival corp or alliance, they are immune to everything. So what? You can't threaten (or even target) anyone until you decloak. Solo players (like myself) are still playing a multiplayer game, we're just not playing team style. I fail to see why you find this such a horrible thing. So you can get spied on. Too bad.
Anig Browl Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.27 18:56:00 - [92] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Cloaked ships get to pick when, where, and who they fight, and at what range. If a cloaked ship never attacks, it can never be attacked. It's overpowered. There's no way around that. If it never attacks, it's overpowered. Riiiight.
Grarr Dexx Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2008.08.27 19:06:00 - [93] Hey, it's not our fault you didn't tank for a Rapier or a Huginn when you went outside in your lawless 0.0 free-for-all alliance space
Anig Browl Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.27 19:37:00 - [94] My last reply on this... Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: marakor Everybody in eve can pick when, where and who they fight and at what range unless they choose to fight ships that are incapable of fighting, like docked ships or cloakers that are both harmless until they uncloak or undock. Right, so the hauler can just say "yer not allowed to shoot me" to anyone he pleases. And the ratter out in a pve set up raven is completely immune to that roaming gang of heavy assualt ships. You really should read what you type before you post it. If I'm in anything but a lightweight covert ops ship and have a cloak fitted, I can't warp and my speed is cut way down. So say I fly a hauler into your system and see a gatecamp and activate my cloak...yes, I am unshootable, but it's going to take me 5 minutes or so to sneak past the gate camp and out of bubble range...and I still have to plan my station entrance/exit because I can't cloak within 2km of a station or any ships surrounding it. Meantime I can't target anything (even if I have a passive target module fitted) and am subject to long targeting delays so defensive systems like ECM are compromised (unless you are dumb enough to fly within range of ECM bursts or smart bombs. It's not like you just fit a cloak and keep playing the same way but with the bonus of invisibility; there's a big time penalty. Assuming you have cloaking V and an improved cloaking device II, you're still looking at a 10 second targeting delay after you decloak and a permanent 40% hit to your scan resolution which really hurts against small targets. 10 seconds is a long time in combat; the only way to offset that is to switch to less powerful FOF missiles (with all their tactical disadvantages). The covert ops cloaking device requires so much CPU that it's impractical for use one anything but covert ops ships, which are not a direct threat. True, a gang could warp to the cov ops ship and attack you, but if there is a bunch of unknowns in local you should be looking over your shoulder in any case. Quote: Being completely safe no matter where you are (aka immune, which your targets are not) is not balanced. Denial is very unbecoming. Seeing as how I can't target anything when cloaked, your argument fails.
Quesa Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.27 20:56:00 - [95] All I see in this thread are a bunch of people that A)Don't want anything to change because they can't adapt to any new situations, B)Want a change because they can't adapt to the current situation. I guess the point is, LEARN TO ADAPT.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.27 21:27:00 - [96] The nerf bat will come.
Strill	Posted - 2008.08.27 21:31:00 - [97] Originally by: Anig Browl Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Cloaking will get nerfed. There is no counter for cloaking. Whether it's a raven ratting in 0.0, or one person trying to intimidate/disrupt/spy on a rival corp or alliance, they are immune to everything. So what? You can't threaten (or even target) anyone until you decloak. Solo players (like myself) are still playing a multiplayer game, we're just not playing team style. I fail to see why you find this such a horrible thing. So you can get spied on. Too bad. Since when do you need to target someone to threaten them? Goonfleet could send an eve mail to some 5 man corp telling them that if they don't pay 400 million isk, they'll get war decced. In that case, the 5 man corp has been threatened without anyone even getting in a ship. You don't need to target or shoot anyone or do anything in order to threaten someone. All you need to do is be capable of shooting them.
Strill	Posted - 2008.08.27 21:42:00 - [98] Ok how about this suggestion: #1. You only become immune to probing once your cloak has been continuously activated for x minutes. (x could vary depending on the quality of cloak you're using) #2. CCP adds a short-range (50km?) anti-cloaking sensor that reveals cloaked ships within its radius. So in this way, a ship that's just sitting there cloaked still can't be detected, but a ship that's revealed itself can't just get away scot free.
Dr Slaughter Minmatar Rabies Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.27 21:46:00 - [99] Meh do what you like to cloaking as long as you implement this too ~~~~ There is no parody in this thread. Honest.
sophisticatedlimabean Gallente Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.08.27 21:50:00 - [100] EVE has been going for quite a long time so most things being used now are adaptations ppl have developed to deal with the various aspects of eve. Cloaking is just the way ppl have come to deal with being deep in hostile space where they are constantly outnumbered and out gunned. It gives them the opportunity to stay in the area and attack disorganized, unprepared and or unskilled(as in not 0.0 savvy) targets. While some may think that a nerf is inevitable im sure ccp will not implement a nerf that allows the cloak to be probed rendering it useless and a pointless module, but they may introduce a timer that needs to be clicked after a certain amount of elapsed time so ppl cannot go constantly AFK. My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake.
Jimbob Jumbo Macabre Votum Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.08.28 11:37:00 - [101] Seriously, i think we need this: I.E: A bomber undocks and warps to a gate, where the blob of piewats sit waiting for targets. The bomber arrives, and pushes his cloak butan', and a message pops up: "X IS ENGAGING CLOAK. SIGNATURE RADIUS CHANGED TO: 9000000000000000000***KKM, AUTOTARGETING FOR ALL OTHER ENTETIES HAS BEEN ENABLED. REACTIVATION DELAY: 9 WEEKS, SPEED BONUS: -20000%" Suddenly the bomber is safe as it travels backwards at 5au/s. oknowgimmecake. Jizuz... I know the feeling dude, some ppl r just never satisfied unless its all for their gain.
Mighty Ahti Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.29 00:07:00 - [102] Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Mighty Ahti Post of FAIL Well you can¦t even handle the risk of posting with a Main on Internet Spaceship Games eh? At the moment people go AFK in hostile space and are unscannable, unpredictable and unkillable(till they deactivate the cloak for a reason ) EVE is ballanced. Owait, it is not, it is broken. Give people a way to scan down the afk cloakers, so they can not longer do it afk and everybody is happy. Any non AKF player can avoid to get caugt by probes on a SS I see not even one valid reason a afk player should be save if not docked, at a pos or simply logged out of the game. You make a bold accusation. I'm flattered you took the time to investigate my character so thoroughly that you decided I'm an alt. Why do people think there's a problem with cloaks because people go AFK with them on? The thing that's needed is an AFK timer that removes a player if no ship movement has been done in 5 minutes or some other arbitrary number. Cloaks don't need a "fix", AFKing does.
Acounting Ex Divinitas Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.29 00:39:00 - [103] yep its really fair in 0.0 with all that risk of bening killed when you can just cloak all the problems away. there ships ment to cloak and the rest not so much. why shouldnt there be some way for everyone to face = risk all the time?
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.29 13:03:00 - [104] Originally by: Acounting yep its really fair in 0.0 with all that risk of bening killed when you can just cloak all the problems away. there ships ment to cloak and the rest not so much. why shouldnt there be some way for everyone to face = risk all the time? OK so with this logic, people docked in outposts and inside POS sheres should be at risk too ... right... Seriously! you are not making any sense.
Glach Duwat	Posted - 2008.08.29 13:18:00 - [105] Seriously. I don't understand the cloaking nerf. Whats wrong with AFK? Seriously. What online game DOESN'T have AFK? There are shirts, and hats with AFK stitched on them. It is just a fact of MMO life. People want to stay logged in, even if they can't be at the computer right then. First off. Cloaks are balanced. Non-Covert ships get nerfed hard. They go stupidly slow, they can't activate any modules, they can't warp, and when they do decloak, there is a stupidly long "sensor recalibration" delay in order to lock their opponent. Covert ships don't have the speed penalty, and can warp, but they are paper thin. As I've pointed out, try taking on a ratting typhoon with a rapier. Good luck. Not to mention the Recons have been repeatedly nerfed lately. The Arazu had RSD's nerfed. The Pilgrim got their Nos Nerfed, Rapier is getting speed/web nerfed. The Falcon is alright, but what damage can it do It needs a gang to really be effective against anything. Cov-Ops frigates? Can they even break a Mining barge's shields un-tanked? Doubt it. And you want to make it HARDER on these ships? A Fuel bay? Thats great, so no, warping cloaked is going to mean I am wasting fuel, A Recon, that Can't cloak because it doesn't have fuel? This is stupd. Whoever suggested it is stupid. An AFK Timer? What if I'm not AFK, and then have to take a sh!t in the middle of a roaming op? I Cloak, and then suddenly I de-cloak 15 minutes later because those beans took their toll, and I get probed and lose my 100+ million isk ship. Seriously. AFKing is not a problem. Don't like someone locking down your favorite ratting system in 0.0? Do something about it. Get a gang together to bait it out. Move over a couple systems. Fit a cloak to your ship. What ever. Cloaks do not enhance the ships combat abilities. And once they are in a battle, they cannot disengage at will and just run away, the speed nerf makes sure of that. Ships that really take advantage of cloaking do crap dps, and have crap tanks. Ones that don't get horribly hit with drawbacks as it is. Get over it. Cloaks are balanced. If you want to make isk in peace move to high sec or GTFO my eve.
Plunkett Macleane	Posted - 2008.08.29 13:48:00 - [106] I just think if your cloaked you should not show up in the local chat. Unless you activate it. If I am sneaking through a hot system, and all of a sudden some stranger pops up on their local chat. I feel like it kinda gives me away.
Asno Malo	Posted - 2008.08.29 14:37:00 - [107] Originally by: Plunkett Macleane I just think if your cloaked you should not show up in the local chat. Unless you activate it. If I am sneaking through a hot system, and all of a sudden some stranger pops up on their local chat. I feel like it kinda gives me away. Yes!!!! I recently spent a week in enemy territory, cloaked of course. I spoke in local only on the first day, and that was to help the enemies alliance pet break away from the enemy alliance. Anyway, the rest of the week, I was completely quiet in local, sitting 80KM from a gate or station for 60 - 90 minutes at a time gathering intel, or sitting in a belt watching rats spawn on the off chance an elite spawned. Sitting outside their production POS learning how many ships they were building a day. After the first day, the only reason they even knew I was there was because of local. If anything should be nerfed, it should be local.
Acidictadpole ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.08.29 20:56:00 - [108] CCP have already said that local is going to be changed somehow. So I'm sure that an opt-out local will be more likely. And this makes everyone happy, since cloaking and non-cloaking will have exactly the same immunities! Balanced right? Don't get scammed
Nahkep Narmelion	Posted - 2008.08.29 23:39:00 - [109] Quote: I mission in high sec. I pvp in gangs, in low sec or 0.0. I solo rat (with a cloak) in 0.0. Mining sucks. Bwahahaha...hypocrite. And no a cloak is not the "I never loose button". I've ratted with a cloak, and have been killed. As people have pointed out, to do anything you have to uncloak...then you are vulnerable. Once someone starts targeting you, your cloak is now equivalent to an emply high slot.
Acounting Ex Divinitas Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.30 01:21:00 - [110] Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja Originally by: Acounting yep its really fair in 0.0 with all that risk of bening killed when you can just cloak all the problems away. there ships ment to cloak and the rest not so much. why shouldnt there be some way for everyone to face = risk all the time? OK so with this logic, people docked in outposts and inside POS sheres should be at risk too ... right... Seriously! you are not making any sense. people in POS arnt that safe maybe you never seen a titan warp in to your pos a DD you in the shield. at least with people in POS and docked there mostly safe. well cloaked. your always safe, roaming gangs cant get you. or you grief a system for hour maybe 1/2 the time afk. you should be able to sit in somone else ome system all day and have no way to be found.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.30 01:33:00 - [111] Originally by: Mighty Ahti Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Mighty Ahti Post of FAIL Well you can¦t even handle the risk of posting with a Main on Internet Spaceship Games eh? At the moment people go AFK in hostile space and are unscannable, unpredictable and unkillable(till they deactivate the cloak for a reason ) EVE is ballanced. Owait, it is not, it is broken. Give people a way to scan down the afk cloakers, so they can not longer do it afk and everybody is happy. Any non AKF player can avoid to get caugt by probes on a SS I see not even one valid reason a afk player should be save if not docked, at a pos or simply logged out of the game. You make a bold accusation. I'm flattered you took the time to investigate my character so thoroughly that you decided I'm an alt. Why do people think there's a problem with cloaks because people go AFK with them on? The thing that's needed is an AFK timer that removes a player if no ship movement has been done in 5 minutes or some other arbitrary number. Cloaks don't need a "fix", AFKing does. Well the post, written like this only coveres some parts of cloaking, and also has the preaty common, im right you are ALL wrong style, that is sadly very common at this kind of Forums today, leading in a simlar replay style. Seeing no Corp displayed allways sugests me that this is a alt(ofc I did a little check via Standings and KMs to not base my sugestion at nothing) often is only used for trolling, and hiding the orginal direction where this post come from and what kind of view the poster has to back up his post. I can¦t remember any constructive or usefull Thread here on the Forums that is started by a alt(at least a Forum Alt). So what is your reason to post this with a alt in the end? If you would actualy take the time to read thrue your own Thread you would find multiply statments about your fist question. Also my statments that only the ability to be perfectly save while beeing afk is a problem in the end. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.30 01:55:00 - [112] Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion Quote: I mission in high sec. I pvp in gangs, in low sec or 0.0. I solo rat (with a cloak) in 0.0. Mining sucks. Bwahahaha...hypocrite. And no a cloak is not the "I never loose button". I've ratted with a cloak, and have been killed. As people have pointed out, to do anything you have to uncloak...then you are vulnerable. Once someone starts targeting you, your cloak is now equivalent to an emply high slot. Ya just noticed that? Der I use a cloak, why wouldn't I? I also fly a nano Vaga. Why would I not make full use of overpower mechanics? If you've lost a ratting ship with a cloak, you fail at eve. Watch local. SS and cloak is complete immunity. Hell just cloaking is complete immunity most of the time. Use a scout alt in a shuttle, when changing systems, and you never EVER die.
Mighty Ahti Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.30 02:25:00 - [113] Originally by: The Djego Well the post, written like this only coveres some parts of cloaking, and also has the preaty common, im right you are ALL wrong style, that is sadly very common at this kind of Forums today, leading in a simlar replay style. Seeing no Corp displayed allways sugests me that this is a alt(ofc I did a little check via Standings and KMs to not base my sugestion at nothing) often is only used for trolling, and hiding the orginal direction where this post come from and what kind of view the poster has to back up his post. I can¦t remember any constructive or usefull Thread here on the Forums that is started by a alt(at least a Forum Alt). So what is your reason to post this with a alt in the end? If you would actualy take the time to read thrue your own Thread you would find multiply statments about your fist question. Also my statments that only the ability to be perfectly save while beeing afk is a problem in the end. I can't cover everything in cloaking. But I had assumed that people had read the other cloaking threads. I never meant (entirely) for this to turn into what I was ranting about. I was more upset about the daily whine threads about nerfing than actually wanting to prove a point. And I said that. But you're right, I am an alt. I honestly don't think there's a problem with Alt-posting. I'm sorry you do. Some of us prefer to keep our main's off the forums for specific reasons and I don't think I'm required to share those reasons with you. I do believe however that one should not stand aligned to certain entities with an alt, bashing them or otherwise, but since I do not do that I don't see the problem. This forum should be the least of your worries for alt posting. If the alt makes good points I don't really think it should matter who his main is. Besides, what makes you so sure you'd think my main was any less of an alt than this character?
Immersive Immersive Technology Solutions	Posted - 2008.08.30 04:35:00 - [114] Get rid of Local, or make it opt-in. Then we wouldn't have the problems with the AFK cloakers locking down systems. A cloak doesn't make a ship superior, but it does give it a tactical advantage. Cloaking is a counter to probes, but utterly and completely nerfs the ship while it's active. Warping cloaked is a special rule available only to 8 ships in total. Recalibration delay applies to all but 8 ships, and those 8 can't warp cloaked. If you still want a counter for the cloaks, then find me a counter for smart bombs vs missiles, or webs vs MWD. IIRC, Eve doesn't have counter-counter systems (ECM is a primary, not a counter, therefore ECCM is a counter, not a counter-counter) IMO, cloaking is fine, it's the omniscient Local that needs to go. --- New to the API? GrabRaw XML It's coming...
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.30 12:35:00 - [115] Originally by: The Djego 3. A broken game mechanic if it leads to compleet savety in hostile space while you beeing afk. Damn and there was I thinking it was ok to dock at a station in low-sec... Clearly all stations should be removed everywhere because I can dock at one and walk away and still appear in local... Seriously, this is a pointless debate. People will continue to whine because one group is affecting another group's playstyle. No matter what CCP do, some will view that if at any point they are disadvantaged and can't win, then the game is broken and should support them. I hesitate to use the tired meme 'Learn to play' but perhaps those advocating changes to cloaks should first try and use them and see what is involved before claiming they're so bloody perfect. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.30 13:59:00 - [116] Edited by: The Djego on 30/08/2008 13:59:47 Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Originally by: The Djego 3. A broken game mechanic if it leads to compleet savety in hostile space while you beeing afk. Damn and there was I thinking it was ok to dock at a station in low-sec... Clearly all stations should be removed everywhere because I can dock at one and walk away and still appear in local... Seriously, this is a pointless debate. People will continue to whine because one group is affecting another group's playstyle. No matter what CCP do, some will view that if at any point they are disadvantaged and can't win, then the game is broken and should support them.. All this points was allready in the this Thread but ok one more time for the tl;dr crowd, afk Docking -> people know you are docked, if people pay attention they know when you undock, you can¦t undock afk, you need a system with a station for this, if you undock people have a good chance to get you or force you back to redocking if they want and pay atention -> there is no problem, if you want to counter it you perfectly can do it. Also in 90% of all cases people that are docked in low Sec are indeet afk and I spend lots of time there to know this. Originally by: Astria Tiphareth I hesitate to use the tired meme 'Learn to play' but perhaps those advocating changes to cloaks should first try and use them and see what is involved before claiming they're so bloody perfect. Re read the thread, look at the points given! The problem is cloak + afkabiltiy without a connter to catch people, because they can stay there save and forcing permanent attention without any afford. If people have to be on the controls for this, people won¦t do it because it is booring now, not only for the defender but also for the attacker. Also I use cloaks to, but not for afk cloaking games. Again try to read Threads before you hit the replay button. @the OP i only given my reasons because I totaly dislike alt posts in about any kind of gamebalance, this is not a point of discussion but my point of view and my experience here on the forums... ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.30 14:13:00 - [117] Originally by: The Djego Re read the thread, look at the points given! The problem is cloak + afkabiltiy without a connter to catch people, because they can stay there save and forcing permanent attention without any afford. If people have to be on the controls for this, people won¦t do it because it is booring now, not only for the defender but also for the attacker. Also I use cloaks to, but not for afk cloaking games. Again try to read Threads before you hit the replay button. On the contrary I have read the thread. I suppose my sarcasm was a little harsh, but overall I think the problem isn't cloaks or AFK at all, it's over-reliance on local rather than actual defense, and an obsession over being able to kill any target you see in local. Put simply, if you're not paying attention enough whilst out ratting or whatever regardless of whether there's a cloaker there or not, then you're not paying enough attention full stop. I don't see how we can have this both ways. We can't people claiming low-sec and null-sec are dangerous places where you should have your wits about you, and then go into a tiz about how one AFK cloaker has meant you might have to worry about an enemy in system. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:01:00 - [118] Originally by: The Djego AFK cloaking-> PPL know your in system cloaked by looking at scans of the system-> if ppl pay attention (to scans) they know when you uncloak->you cannot uncloak afk-> if you uncloak people have a good chance to get you or force you back to recloaking if they want and pay attention.....ect ect. Fixed. See what i did there?.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:25:00 - [119] Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego AFK cloaking-> PPL know your in system cloaked by looking at scans of the system-> if ppl pay attention (to scans) they know when you uncloak->you cannot uncloak afk-> if you uncloak people have a good chance to get you or force you back to recloaking if they want and pay attention.....ect ect. Fixed. See what i did there?. Yes you try to restart trolling... ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:34:00 - [120] Originally by: The Djego Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego AFK cloaking-> PPL know your in system cloaked by looking at scans of the system-> if ppl pay attention (to scans) they know when you uncloak->you cannot uncloak afk-> if you uncloak people have a good chance to get you or force you back to recloaking if they want and pay attention.....ect ect. Fixed. See what i did there?. Yes you pointed out why cloaking is fine and carebears are lazy self involved whiners... Fixed again.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:35:00 - [121] Edited by: The Djego on 30/08/2008 16:36:33 Edited by: The Djego on 30/08/2008 16:36:10 Originally by: The Djego Originally by: marakor Originally by: The Djego AFK cloaking-> PPL know your in system cloaked by looking at scans of the system-> if ppl pay attention (to scans) they know when you uncloak->you cannot uncloak afk-> if you uncloak people have a good chance to get you or force you back to recloaking if they want and pay attention.....ect ect. Fixed. See what i did there?. Yes you try to restart trolling... Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Originally by: The Djego Re read the thread, look at the points given! The problem is cloak + afkabiltiy without a connter to catch people, because they can stay there save and forcing permanent attention without any afford. If people have to be on the controls for this, people won¦t do it because it is booring now, not only for the defender but also for the attacker. Also I use cloaks to, but not for afk cloaking games. Again try to read Threads before you hit the replay button. On the contrary I have read the thread. I suppose my sarcasm was a little harsh, but overall I think the problem isn't cloaks or AFK at all, it's over-reliance on local rather than actual defense, and an obsession over being able to kill any target you see in local. Put simply, if you're not paying attention enough whilst out ratting or whatever regardless of whether there's a cloaker there or not, then you're not paying enough attention full stop. I don't see how we can have this both ways. We can't people claiming low-sec and null-sec are dangerous places where you should have your wits about you, and then go into a tiz about how one AFK cloaker has meant you might have to worry about an enemy in system. Paying attention, react when somebody tryes to get in, try to kill him? Basicly EvE, since everybody uses Local fair game for all. Shure we can play blind cow around in the systems without Local, but we do both, so again fair deal. Local is find as long everbody have it, Local would be find if nobody have it, by this it is no problem, simply a game mechanic everybody uses and need attention to use it right. The imbalance is simply one have to pay attention all the time and the other one can go afk looking in every here and then and check for a opertunity. People pay atention but are serious **ed that they are the only ones that have to, since the cloaker is absolutly save till he makes his move without the need of beeing realy there and a need of attention to stay save. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by:** Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:38:00 - [122] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 30/08/2008 16:47:33 Originally by: Acounting people in POS arnt that safe maybe you never seen a titan warp in to your pos a DD you in the shield. at least with people in POS and docked there mostly safe. well cloaked. your always safe, roaming gangs cant get you. or you grief a system for hour maybe 1/2 the time afk. you should be able to sit in somone else ome system all day and have no way to be found. Umm I have seen this happen several times. By hostiles and by friendlies. ...Just as I have seen people DD cloaked ships that they KNOW are in system and suspect are in the same grid. The difference is that in order to DD someone inside POS shield the titan pilot needs POS password. (unless somethings changed since last time...). If the POS doesnt have a password or password has leaked to hostiles then it's the POS owners stupidity and nothing more. To even compare the illusion of security that cloaking provides, to security offered by POS or outpost, you would first have to introduce a password for cloak that allows the user to remain cloaked and completely invunerable even when bumped. Now Im quite sure everyone agrees that this 'feature' would be just ridiculous. Roaming gang cant get you at a POS either, nor will they usually even warp to one, however lucky bump close to gate can render cloak completely useless. Now how is this "always safe"? Only way for a cloaker to gain the element of supprice that cloak is SUPPOSED to offer, is to stay in system for extended periods of time. True or not, this is always refered same as going AFK. Not really point in arguing if the pilot is AFK or not when you cant see him do anything, is there? Because honestly, YOU do NOT know for sure. If someone can be bothered to sit in one system for 12 hours in order to get a kill, they deserve it dont you agree? EDIT: Originally by: The Djego All this points was allready in the this Thread but ok one more time for the tl;dr crowd, afk Docking -> people know you are docked, if people pay attention they know when you undock, you can¦t undock afk, you need a system with a station for this, if you undock people have a good chance to get you or force you back to redocking if they want and pay atention -> there is no problem, if you want to counter it you perfectly can do it. Also in 90% of all cases people that are docked in low Sec are indeet afk and I spend lots of time there to know this. Just like people know someone is docked they also know if someone is cloaked -> people know you are cloaked, if people pay attention they know when you unclock, you can't willingly uncloak AFK. If you uncloak, people have a good chance to get you or force you to cloak again. If you want to counter it you perfectly can do it. Your logic...
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:43:00 - [123] Originally by: The Djego The imbalance is simply one have to pay attention all the time and the other one can go afk looking in every here and then and check for a opportunity. So your saying that npc 0.0 and low sec are broken because you need to watch the station all the time in case a hostile ship undocks. And do you not think that deep non npc space 0.0 should be less safe than low sec and npc 0.0?????. A simple timer you need to reset every 30 mins or so will stop afk cloaking, what do you intend to do about npc and low sec stations ppl can sit in afk and undock when they are not afk.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.30 16:53:00 - [124] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 30/08/2008 16:55:30 Originally by: The Djego Paying attention, react when somebody tryes to get in, try to kill him? Basicly EvE, since everybody uses Local fair game for all. Shure we can play blind cow around in the systems without Local, but we do both, so again fair deal. Local is find as long everbody have it, Local would be find if nobody have it, by this it is no problem, simply a game mechanic everybody uses and need attention to use it right. The imbalance is simply one have to pay attention all the time and the other one can go afk looking in every here and then and check for a opertunity. People pay atention but are serious ****ed that they are the only ones that have to, since the cloaker is absolutly save till he makes his move without the need of beeing realy there and a need of attention to stay save. Just as people docked into an outpost or being inside a POS sphere are completely safe untill they decide to make their move. How is that different from cloaking, other than while cloaked you are still somewhat vulnerable if you position yourself to wrong place. For example: Theres a cloaker in hostile station system looking for a target. Now he KNOWs that there are a lot of people in local, but he has NO idea how many are actually docked or AFK. To have any kind of advantage the cloaker needs to pay attention to hes scanners all the time so he can see whos doing what and when is the right time to engage. So you see, it works both ways unlike you suggest
Meina Lamia	Posted - 2008.08.30 17:44:00 - [125] Haha I see this thread has a Fix Fairy in it. Got to love them, put a post under your pillow and up pops a Fix Fairy hehe Cloaks were first done to repersent the cold war sub hunts. I think the issue here is you have the sub, but not the means for the hunt which creats the situation you have now. I don't see a issue with ships that are ment to stay cloaked but for ships that arnt ment for it there lies your problem. You should probably have Cloaks eat at your cap and reduce your cap regen whether its on or off. Second, you should probably have Probes and Ships/Moduals that are just ment for finding cloaked ships. So no you have a balance. A means to now hunt cloaked vessels. And a difference between those who are ment to cloak and those who have it just added to their vessel. Those vessels who are ment to cloak only need to worry about those who have the ablity to hunt them and don't suffer any cap and cap regen issues that non professional cloakers have.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.30 18:02:00 - [126] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 30/08/2008 18:03:01 Originally by: Meina Lamia Haha I see this thread has a Fix Fairy in it. Got to love them, put a post under your pillow and up pops a Fix Fairy hehe Cloaks were first done to repersent the cold war sub hunts. I think the issue here is you have the sub, but not the means for the hunt which creats the situation you have now. I don't see a issue with ships that are ment to stay cloaked but for ships that arnt ment for it there lies your problem. You should probably have Cloaks eat at your cap and reduce your cap regen whether its on or off. Second, you should probably have Probes and Ships/Moduals that are just ment for finding cloaked ships. So no you have a balance. A means to now hunt cloaked vessels. And a difference between those who are ment to cloak and those who have it just added to their vessel. Those vessels who are ment to cloak only need to worry about those who have the ablity to hunt them and don't suffer any cap and cap regen issues that non professional cloakers have. Sorry to say, but would probably render cloaking unusalbe as a as a defence mechanism. Actually, what new did this post contain again? Also Im really not geting the attitude to class ships according to what they are 'supposed' to be fitting in a game that gets its uniqueness from the different fittings and thinking out of the box.. Sure some modules get bonuses and some ships are better at doing a certain thing than others. That shouldnt suggest that its THE only way to fit any ship though. The tradeoffs for fitting a cloak have already been presented countless times in this thread so Im not gonna bother anymore. Instead Im just gonna ask you to read the entire thread and if you still feel the same after that. Then you can be happy and continue living in that black and white coloured world of denial and selfdeception. (Thats the easy way to live your life and Im jealous to those people, managing to do so)
Acidictadpole ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.08.30 18:27:00 - [127] Edited by: Acidictadpole on 30/08/2008 18:27:35 Originally by: Meina Lamia Stuff As it has been pointed out. Counters in Eve rarely have counter-counters. That is to say, that ECCM has no real counter, neither do defenders. Cloaking IS a counter, so its fair to say that it shouldn't have a counter itself. Cloaking is a counter to probes and the scanner and it shouldn't be taken otherwise. Local gives people too much information about their surroundings. And that is both a buff and a nerf for cloaking at the same time. I'm sure that if local was removed, we'd see a few things happen. For one, people would start doing what they should be doing now, and that's missioning/ratting in gangs. Second, the AFK cloakers would lose their reason for being AFK and they'd stop doing that. And third, you'd see a lot more engagements happening since ratters and stuff would only know about incomings when they're on the scanner or on grid. (How it should be) You talk about the subhunt, but you forget that the atlantic ocean doesn't have a local chat. Don't get scammed
Meina Lamia	Posted - 2008.08.30 18:38:00 - [128] So are you saying we don't have ships now that arnt ment to do certain things? Such as Dreads and Carriers? Bombers and Coventers? Are you saying that building in mechenism that requiers you to be active will take away from a ship? It wouldnt stop you from using cloaks, hell it would stop alot of things. I use to remember Burn Eden would sit in their ravens cloaked, suddenly decloak and pound the crap out of somebody and recloak again. It wouldnt prevent that still, it would just means a more active roll for those who are cloaking in ships not made for it. As for post about the disadvantages of the cloak, apperntly they are not to much of a issue, its still very very viable. Only reason you have seen less of it is because a new fad came along with the Nanos. Its really no different then putting in different scripts in modual, range or tracking, advantage, disadvantage in one direction or the other no matter which way you go. Adding some balance to the cloak doesnt take away from the game, it just makes those who use it more active. I personally don't think EVE's combat was ment to be static, I think there was a reason why ships that were ment to cloak don't have as much weapon capability as those that werent ment to. There was sacrifice in weaponry involved for stealth. I know even the lock on delay from the Cloak never stopped me from locking down a nice fat and juicy ratter. Crying about how further adjusting the Cloak for balance will adjust ships uniques is like crying that short range weapons only shoot short range or that shield booster don't regen armor.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.30 19:09:00 - [129] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 30/08/2008 19:14:30 Originally by: Meina Lamia So are you saying we don't have ships now that arnt ment to do certain things? Such as Dreads and Carriers? Bombers and Coventers? Are you saying that building in mechenism that requiers you to be active will take away from a ship? It wouldnt stop you from using cloaks, hell it would stop alot of things. I use to remember Burn Eden would sit in their ravens cloaked, suddenly decloak and pound the crap out of somebody and recloak again. It wouldnt prevent that still, it would just means a more active roll for those who are cloaking in ships not made for it. As for post about the disadvantages of the cloak, apperntly they are not to much of a issue, its still very very viable. Only reason you have seen less of it is because a new fad came along with the Nanos. Its really no different then putting in different scripts in modual, range or tracking, advantage, disadvantage in one direction or the other no matter which way you go. Adding some balance to the cloak doesnt take away from the game, it just makes those who use it more active. I personally don't think EVE's combat was ment to be static, I think there was a reason why ships that were ment to cloak don't have as much weapon capability as those that werent ment to. There was sacrifice in weaponry involved for stealth. I know even the lock on delay from the Cloak never stopped me from locking down a nice fat and juicy ratter. Crying about how further adjusting the Cloak for balance will adjust ships uniques is like crying that short range weapons only shoot short range or that shield booster don't regen armor. Arent you puting words into peoples mouths here a bit? The issues already discussed are hardly that black and white. About ships and roles, bringing dreads and mining barges (I think you ment them atleas) into this discussion, just shows how desperate you are at finding valid arguments to tip the scale to your favor. Everyone able to fly dreads know, that its about the only ships in game that has but one or two usable roles. But since theres no stopping you then fine. If we follow your logic we could safely say that mining barge shouldnt be able to fit combat drones or any offensive modules to defend itself since its ment to be a mining ship. Was this what you were after? (didnt think so) For the record, Im not against reasonable mechanic to find cloaked ship while they're cloaked. However, most of the suggestions in this thread would gimp cloaks so badly that there would be no using them in the future and that is what I wish to prevent. It's simple really. As long as cloaking ship has to stay in one system (one local) long perionds to reach the advantage that cloak is supposed to offer in the first place, there shouldnt be any means to find them while they're aquiring this advantage. (What would be to point of fitting a cloak without this?) If cloakers are made really invisible (local is disabled as intel tool) then absolutely, there should be something that can reveal a cloaker. Since they have made a move that revealed their precense, it would be only fair that other side gets an opportunity to find this cloaker. Generally speaking, making mechanics that can be disrupted by funktionality of the server cluster (or better yet, the lack of funktionality) is just asking for trouble. (see: "puting few minute timer to keep cloak active in environment that can cause several minutes long delays or drop you completely when you least expect it")
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.08.30 21:40:00 - [130] Originally by: Meina Lamia Cloaks were first done to repersent the cold war sub hunts. Really on what planet?...do you have a link to prove that????.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.31 00:05:00 - [131] Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja Just as people docked into an outpost or being inside a POS sphere are completely safe untill they decide to make their move. How is that different from cloaking, other than while cloaked you are still somewhat vulnerable if you position yourself to wrong place. For example: Theres a cloaker in hostile station system looking for a target. Now he KNOWs that there are a lot of people in local, but he has NO idea how many are actually docked or AFK. To have any kind of advantage the cloaker needs to pay attention to hes scanners all the time so he can see whos doing what and when is the right time to engage. So you see, it works both ways unlike you suggest The difference is a cloaker takes his "station" or "pos shield" everywhere he goes. All these arguements about "0.0 is supposed to be unsafe" are completely moot. Anyone with a cloak is completely safe where ever he wants to be.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.31 00:17:00 - [132] One mechanic that would help greatly I think, without destroying cloaks, would be to have onboard scanners list "cloaked contact" in the scan results. It doesn't have to give range or direction even, just a little warning that there is a cloaked object within your scan radius.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 06:09:00 - [133] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 31/08/2008 06:09:51 Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 31/08/2008 06:09:19 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass One mechanic that would help greatly I think, without destroying cloaks, would be to have onboard scanners list "cloaked contact" in the scan results. It doesn't have to give range or direction even, just a little warning that there is a cloaked object within your scan radius. How about this: Everyone that knows anything about submarines (since thats the todays favorite comparison to covertops it seems..), knows that they are identified using individual sound signatures. To get a new signature a sub needs to find this new contact ofc'. Now what if person seeing a cloaker could scan him after geting cloakers signature? Naturally since its the distant future, the stealth technology would be evolved a bit and ship signatures would be ever changing (just to keep game playable). So say the scanning ship needs to have a target lock or be in a gang where someone is having a target lock at the time of that event, in order to identify the cloakers signature and after that scanners ship computer would be able to identify cloakers signature even when its cloaked and could use probes and on board scanners to pinpoint the bastard. This ability would last only limited time (15...20 minutes, just a matter of tweaking), since cloakers signature changes all the time, the scanners ship computer cant adjust to changes indefinately. This would revard team work and ganging up and gives a good possibility for defender to gank the cloaker. However this would not render cloaking completely useless. Ofcourse this implementation would require local to be removed in order to give cloakers any kind of change to do their job in the first place, so the whole idea is hypotetical.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.08.31 10:12:00 - [134] Local, onboard scanners, and probes all need a bit of a rework. I'm not quite sure what you mean in your description, but I can tell you alot about submarines, as I operated the firecontrol systems onboard a 688i attack sub for 4 years. While a sound signature is useful for identifying a contact, it's not required for tracking or even discovering a contact. Any stray sound can disclose the exsistance and realative bearing of a hidden contact. Any series of sounds from the same contact will allow you to track it, though the more frequent and repetative the sound the easier the contact is to track. Subs remain hidden, because radar is useless underwater, visibility is poor (most of the time), and they don't make enough sound to be picked up over the background noise of the ocean. There are several short to medium range ways to detect a sub though. Echo location from an active sonar "ping" (medium range). The electro-magnetic disturbance created when a ship moves through the earths magnetic field (medium short). The presure waves created by the displacement of a ships hull through the surrounding water (short range). The second two of these methods requires the target to be moving and are mainly used on mines and stationary listening posts. In game I think of scanners and sensors as "radar" and visual. A cloak hides a ship from both, unless you get very very close. Now what we lack in game is "sonar". A method to detect the stray "noise" a ship makes that isn't masked by the cloak (tachions, quarks, neutrinos, sub space distorsion, whatever). We also don't have an active ping, or any close range method of detection other then smart bombs.
Sydonis Caldari Xoth Inc	Posted - 2008.08.31 12:04:00 - [135] Personally, I see 3 seperate issues with cloaking... 1) Ships not intended to cloak. These should be really hit hard or even not allowed to cloak without requiring a HUGE cap/tank/CPU/pg hit to make them harder to fit for fighting. Such cloaking devices could be changed to not hide the ship visually, but (instead) make a ship really hard to probe up. This would stop them loitering in belts, but allow them to spend some time in open space without having to check the scanner every 20 seconds to spot probes. I'm not saying to make them immune, but give them some kind of safety to go afk. 2) Recons and Black Ops. These are the potential problem ships where people are concerned. Perhaps make these require fuel for cloaks used at a slow rate or use cap at a rate faster than stock ships will regenerate - this will force the pilot to fit some slots for cap recharge and hamper the combat fit perhaps? 3) Cov-Ops frigs. These are usually weak in PVP directly, unless you manage to jump an indy and, even then, usually cannot kill them unless you find them afk at a safe spot. A single turret or launcher will not usually kill anything more than a pod - and even then you need to get the jump on them in order to lock and warp scramble them. If they're in a formation, you can't touch them since the first volley or two from any combat ship will wipe you out. Could use the same "cap drain" idea as the recons, but I'd suggest a VERY strong cap use reduction as a role bonus, simply due to the fact that they are intended for long term use and face no direct threat. On the other hand, they DO pose a Covert Cyno threat, although such a ship will have either no weapons or no probe launcher, reducing its threat level when not bringing in other ships. Personally, as a cov-ops frig specialist (I can fly recons, but don't do so), I can testify to the lack of combat effectiveness. I can also testify to people assuming that pilots of such craft assuming that they are afk. I can assure you that any specialist will NOT be for the most part. I was sat in IAC territory recording all local comms traffic of interest, monitoring traffic through the system and generally feeding any gate details to my fleet HQ as requested. Over the 15 hours per day, for each of the 4 days I was stationed there, I was afk a total of one hour - fixing food and visiting the toilet was the only breaks I took (thank GOD for DVDs). Never assume that a pilot is afk while cloaked... we were under standing orders to be silent in local while operational. SOP also meant ignoring all convo requests as standard (usually by letting them time out first if safe to do so). I'm sure we're not the only ones to do similar systems.
Acidictadpole ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.08.31 12:55:00 - [136] Edited by: Acidictadpole on 31/08/2008 12:59:28 Originally by: Sydonis Personally, I see 3 seperate issues with cloaking... 1) Ships not intended to cloak. These should be really hit hard or even not allowed to cloak without requiring a HUGE cap/tank/CPU/pg hit to make them harder to fit for fighting. Such cloaking devices could be changed to not hide the ship visually, but (instead) make a ship really hard to probe up. This would stop them loitering in belts, but allow them to spend some time in open space without having to check the scanner every 20 seconds to spot probes. I'm not saying to make them immune, but give them some kind of safety to go afk. The huge hit is a penalty to targeting speed. And 60 CPU isn't exactly "easy on the fittings". I agree that non-cloaking ships need some more.. Like maybe an RoF reduction while they're fit. But they already have tough fittings and stuff. Originally by: Sydonis 2) Recons and Black Ops. These are the potential problem ships where people are concerned. Perhaps make these require fuel for cloaks used at a slow rate or use cap at a rate faster than stock ships will regenerate - this will force the pilot to fit some slots for cap recharge and hamper the combat fit perhaps? Black Ops are a joke currently. They have a little more HP than a battlecruiser, and probably the same DPS. They have fuel issues and their jump bridge has also. I really doubt they need a nerf in the cloaking department, although in lowsec they are uncatchable. As far as recons go. They can rarely solo anything larger than a cruiser. They are support ships in many cases and rarely put out more than 120 or so dps with decent skills. They also have a period after decloaking where they cannot target for at least 5 seconds after doing so. Usually ample time for an aligned target to click warp and get out. Also, 9/10 times the pilot should be fitting some kind of cap modules on their recon anyway as their cap is so bad. I fly rapiers and pilgrims/curses and I always fit a Large Cap Battery and some recharge mods on them. Originally by: Sydonis 3) Cov-Ops frigs. These are usually weak in PVP directly, unless you manage to jump an indy and, even then, usually cannot kill them unless you find them afk at a safe spot. A single turret or launcher will not usually kill anything more than a pod - and even then you need to get the jump on them in order to lock and warp scramble them. If they're in a formation, you can't touch them since the first volley or two from any combat ship will wipe you out. Could use the same "cap drain" idea as the recons, but I'd suggest a VERY strong cap use reduction as a role bonus, simply due to the fact that they are intended for long term use and face no direct threat. On the other hand, they DO pose a Covert Cyno threat, although such a ship will have either no weapons or no probe launcher, reducing its threat level when not bringing in other ships. I agree here, covert ops frigates are not meant for actual combat. But are meant to stay hidden and out of the battle. This ship is one of the primary reasons nerfing the cloak is so hard with regards to being located while a cloak is active. They are supposed to remain hidden and could not handle itself in combat easily even against a noob frig. What I think would be a good idea: Ships that do not have a cloaking bonus (or not fitting covops cloak) do not actually go entirely invisible while cloaked, they appear on scan from all ranges though a distinct location cannot be narrowed down. (They appear on your scan as "Cloaked Signature" at all 5 degree scans.) What I mean by not entirely invisible, is that they dissappear from overview, and their ship becomes like 40% transparent. Meaning you cannot "look at" nor interact with it in any way besides seeing it visually. Which can be tough. I am a big supporter of the cloak how it is. At least how it is on ships that are supposed to use it. Don't get scammed
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 13:26:00 - [137] Originally by: Sydonis Personally, I see 3 seperate issues with cloaking... 1) Ships not intended to cloak. These should be really hit hard or even not allowed to cloak without requiring a HUGE cap/tank/CPU/pg hit to make them harder to fit for fighting. Such cloaking devices could be changed to not hide the ship visually, but (instead) make a ship really hard to probe up. This would stop them loitering in belts, but allow them to spend some time in open space without having to check the scanner every 20 seconds to spot probes. I'm not saying to make them immune, but give them some kind of safety to go afk. 2) Recons and Black Ops. These are the potential problem ships where people are concerned. Perhaps make these require fuel for cloaks used at a slow rate or use cap at a rate faster than stock ships will regenerate - this will force the pilot to fit some slots for cap recharge and hamper the combat fit perhaps? 3) Cov-Ops frigs. These are usually weak in PVP directly, unless you manage to jump an indy and, even then, usually cannot kill them unless you find them afk at a safe spot. A single turret or launcher will not usually kill anything more than a pod - and even then you need to get the jump on them in order to lock and warp scramble them. If they're in a formation, you can't touch them since the first volley or two from any combat ship will wipe you out. Could use the same "cap drain" idea as the recons, but I'd suggest a VERY strong cap use reduction as a role bonus, simply due to the fact that they are intended for long term use and face no direct threat. On the other hand, they DO pose a Covert Cyno threat, although such a ship will have either no weapons or no probe launcher, reducing its threat level when not bringing in other ships. Personally, as a cov-ops frig specialist (I can fly recons, but don't do so), I can testify to the lack of combat effectiveness. I can also testify to people assuming that pilots of such craft assuming that they are afk. I can assure you that any specialist will NOT be for the most part. I was sat in IAC territory recording all local comms traffic of interest, monitoring traffic through the system and generally feeding any gate details to my fleet HQ as requested. Over the 15 hours per day, for each of the 4 days I was stationed there, I was afk a total of one hour - fixing food and visiting the toilet was the only breaks I took (thank GOD for DVDs). Never assume that a pilot is afk while cloaked... we were under standing orders to be silent in local while operational. SOP also meant ignoring all convo requests as standard (usually by letting them time out first if safe to do so). I'm sure we're not the only ones to do similar systems. ...and I thought we were actually making progress for a while ./facepalm
Sydonis Caldari Xoth Inc	Posted - 2008.08.31 14:05:00 - [138] Edited by: Sydonis on 31/08/2008 14:14:00 Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja ...and I thought we were actually making progress for a while ./facepalm Just going to show that you don't know much about cloaking then, given that you cannot cloak while locked... although it's been a while since I allowed anyone to do that to me. Of course, if you're suggesting that they allow this, then you may have more problems. Your suggestion also negates all cloakers and makes them dangerously easy to decloak, effectively neutralising a ship that all fleets make use of (or should). If fleets are slow to engage now, how long do you think they'll take if they have no way to know what's on the other side of the gate? Nerfing unintended-cloakers is a good thing, as is keeping recons under control, but cov-ops frigs are to be kept safe in my opinion (it's highly boring and a job usually given to alts (not suitably in my opinion, unless using two monitors) and too few specialists. I agree that the submarine comparison is a good analogy though - I've long held that a "depth charge" of some kind would be useful - perhaps a good use for a redesigned destroyer or a T2 variant. Some kind of long-ranged smartbomb that does no damage, but can disrupt a cloak, perhaps? Or perhaps some kind of probe to be launched from a launcher similar to a probe launcher that detonates and disrupts cloaks within a certain radius? Obviously, covert cloaks would have to be more resilient and sig radius should also be used to reduce the risk to the cov-ops frigs, given how fragile they are, but just two ideas off the top of my head. As regards Recons, most of the complaints seem to stem from the lack of risk to potential raiders, so I only suggested the changes to those to ease the complaints. Using cap would probably be overcome by using rigs anyhow, to be honest. As for the Black Ops, the changes I suggested might be OK if they gave them use of the covert ops cloaks? I've not flown a Black Ops yet - I can fly them, but don't see much point in even trying until they're fixed. I was only looking at the cloaking issue here, not overall balance for these stricken ships. Quite honestly, I'd hate to be the guy responsible for looking at this whole issue... Edit: One thought - how about the cloak using pg or CPU depending on the sig radius to fit? I've seen cap ships using cloaks (yes, one was a Titan) and I had to wonder HOW much it impacted their combat effectiveness (yes it impacts on locking times, but it that enough?) and thought that this might help? The higher the size of the ship, the harder it should be to cloak it. And the lower-class cloaks should perhaps be impacted more than the more advanced, perhaps? Personally, I don't see any issue with the cov-ops cloaks, but perhaps the non-cov-ops cloaks might need a looking at... and perhaps a more expensive fit is the answer?
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.08.31 14:56:00 - [139] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Local, onboard scanners, and probes all need a bit of a rework. I'm not quite sure what you mean in your description, but I can tell you alot about submarines, as I operated the firecontrol systems onboard a 688i attack sub for 4 years. While a sound signature is useful for identifying a contact, it's not required for tracking or even discovering a contact. Any stray sound can disclose the exsistance and realative bearing of a hidden contact. Any series of sounds from the same contact will allow you to track it, though the more frequent and repetative the sound the easier the contact is to track. Subs remain hidden, because radar is useless underwater, visibility is poor (most of the time), and they don't make enough sound to be picked up over the background noise of the ocean. There are several short to medium range ways to detect a sub though. Echo location from an active sonar "ping" (medium range). The electro-magnetic disturbance created when a ship moves through the earths magnetic field (medium short). The presure waves created by the displacement of a ships hull through the surrounding water (short range). The second two of these methods requires the target to be moving and are mainly used on mines and stationary listening posts. In game I think of scanners and sensors as "radar" and visual. A cloak hides a ship from both, unless you get very very close. Now what we lack in game is "sonar". A method to detect the stray "noise" a ship makes that isn't masked by the cloak (tachions, quarks, neutrinos, sub space distorsion, whatever). We also don't have an active ping, or any close range method of detection other then smart bombs. Hunter Modules / Detector deployables. --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 16:16:00 - [140] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 31/08/2008 16:16:49 Originally by: Sydonis Just going to show that you don't know much about cloaking then, given that you cannot cloak while locked... although it's been a while since I allowed anyone to do that to me. Of course, if you're suggesting that they allow this, then you may have more problems. Your suggestion also negates all cloakers and makes them dangerously easy to decloak, effectively neutralising a ship that all fleets make use of (or should). If fleets are slow to engage now, how long do you think they'll take if they have no way to know what's on the other side of the gate? Nerfing unintended-cloakers is a good thing, as is keeping recons under control, but cov-ops frigs are to be kept safe in my opinion (it's highly boring and a job usually given to alts (not suitably in my opinion, unless using two monitors) and too few specialists. The point was that cloaker would have to commit into combat and / or some comparable activity in order to reseave this disadvantage (Read it again and think it though). That would not change cloakers ability to stay hiden, but it WOULD however offer the change of retaliating when that cloaker tries to engage or have engaged someone. This idea has nothing to do with being able to cloak while targeted. But yeah, this character is not so old, so I MUST know nothing about game mechanics that I have been using for the last 5 years. Originally by: Sydonis I agree that the submarine comparison is a good analogy though - I've long held that a "depth charge" of some kind would be useful - perhaps a good use for a redesigned destroyer or a T2 variant. Some kind of long-ranged smartbomb that does no damage, but can disrupt a cloak, perhaps? Or perhaps some kind of probe to be launched from a launcher similar to a probe launcher that detonates and disrupts cloaks within a certain radius? ..and this is exactly what has already been deemed "extremely exploitable" since you know every carebear would be spamming these when ever they are rating. Originally by: Sydonis Obviously, covert cloaks would have to be more resilient and sig radius should also be used to reduce the risk to the cov-ops frigs, given how fragile they are, but just two ideas off the top of my head. As regards Recons, most of the complaints seem to stem from the lack of risk to potential raiders, so I only suggested the changes to those to ease the complaints. Using cap would probably be overcome by using rigs anyhow, to be honest. As for the Black Ops, the changes I suggested might be OK if they gave them use of the covert ops cloaks? Personally I really dont think anyone should be able to find a cloaker that doesnt want to be found just by deploying some magical device that does untold things and so on... I mean you arent supposed to know the cloaker is there in the first place, which is the real issue behind most whine. Originally by: Sydonis I've not flown a Black Ops yet - I can fly them, but don't see much point in even trying until they're fixed. I was only looking at the cloaking issue here, not overall balance for these stricken ships. Indeed, they are kinda pointless for just the reason pointed out in this thread. Originally by: Sydonis One thought - how about the cloak using pg or CPU depending on the sig radius to fit? I've seen cap ships using cloaks (yes, one was a Titan) and I had to wonder HOW much it impacted their combat effectiveness (yes it impacts on locking times, but it that enough?) and thought that this might help? The higher the size of the ship, the harder it should be to cloak it. And the lower-class cloaks should perhaps be impacted more than the more advanced, perhaps? Thats one way to go. Though it might cause more work than it's worth in the end since balancing ALL ships is a lot of work. But sure if CCP has nothing better to do.
lebrata	Posted - 2008.08.31 16:33:00 - [141] Ppl claim to be against afk cloaking so why not add a simple timer that needs to be clicked every 30 mins or so (the time can be longer or shorter depending on what ppl think is reasonable) that way a cloaker needs to be active or he decloaks and is probable and thus killable.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 17:32:00 - [142] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 31/08/2008 17:36:07 Originally by: lebrata Ppl claim to be against afk cloaking so why not add a simple timer that needs to be clicked every 30 mins or so (the time can be longer or shorter depending on what ppl think is reasonable) that way a cloaker needs to be active or he decloaks and is probable and thus killable. If you read the whole thread (I realize its long and all), you'll get your guestion ansvered many times in detail. In short its a bad thing to add any kind of machanics that depend on being able to push a button when the environment itself might make this impossible. Dont you hate when you cant put your repper or harderenrs on when game is lagging? It would be like trying to tank without auto repeat in 5 minute lag to fly cloaked around a large battle. See my point?
Sydonis Caldari Xoth Inc	Posted - 2008.08.31 17:37:00 - [143] Sorry Taat, but character age doesn't necessarily mean experience in dealing with or flying cloaking ships in any depth - I knew pilots who were years old who still didn't know about cov-ops ships. I apologise if you do have experience with coverts or cloaking. By all means shoot down anything I suggest - after all, we're brainstorming here and something I suggest may inspire another someone else to come up with a better idea. Because, Lebrata, as a cov-ops pilot, I don't want to have to keep clicking on something just because of some idiots going afk in ships not designed for stealth. Unless, of course, you want to make cov-ops frigates able to sit in open space and not be probeable, in which case they won't need the cloak to afk. Anything popping up that'll need attention will be a nuisance and sometimes a cov-ops pilot is going frantic typing intelligence reports, running scans and/or trying to sneak up on enemy ships - having a cloak phase-cycle or require immediate attention to keep it running will cause interruptions at precisely the worst moment, you can be sure. Just for the record, I don't see a problem with cloaks right now (except the Black Ops not being a cov-ops class cloak) but others seem to. One crazy idea... remove ALL non-covert cloaks from ships and have the black ops and bombers use the cov-ops cloaks or have those ships use a 2nd kind of cloak with the same overpowered cloak fitting requirements as the covert and have only those ships with a decent role bonus to the fittings? Or have cloaks use sig radius and somehow limit what ships can fit each size of cloak with all cloaks coming in each of the 4 sizes? Like I said, feel free to shoot them down. And yes, I know CCP has too much on their plate right now...
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 18:04:00 - [144] Originally by: Sydonis Like I said, feel free to shoot them down. And yes, I know CCP has too much on their plate right now... You can be sure that I will be one of the first to discuss and comment on new ideas. Sometimes I think they are bad and I make a point to clear my reasoning when this happens. However ansvering to same questions and commenting on same suggestions manytimes even in same thread gets tiresome at times. This makes you not want to repeat everything you have typed once just few pages earlyer and ansvers become short and not so elegant. For this I am sorry from my own part (only human). On this note, I welcome and always think all orginal ideas through before I ansver. If anyone at any point feels my reasoning isnt clear, then tell me so and I will provide a deeper ansver. However, jumping into conclusions about ideas that migth not be so clear is only causing unnecesary grief and arguing on these boards. ./end emorage Removing regular cloaks is an idea, but I think it would leave a big empty space into game mechanics that are supposed to provide options to defend yourself in not so safe areas in EvE. If this issue can be solved, then by all means, have at it. As it stands, cloaking is about only option for small entities to combat large established allianses that tent to always bring that cursed blob. What ever annoying side effects this raises, they are less about cloaking and more about what game environment allows us to do with them. If there is no need to use AFK cloaking then it wont be 'abused' like some like to think. Because lets face it, its boring as all hell. So instead of nerfing cloaks and ships that use them to kingdom come, I would like to see more suggestion solving the real issue that is the environment. I gurantee those threads will get better wellcoming from both sides.
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.08.31 20:59:00 - [145] i dont see a real problem here, just make probs that find clocked ships when needed..
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.08.31 21:10:00 - [146] Originally by: OffBeaT i dont see a real problem here, just make probs that find clocked ships when needed.. ...The same day they make probes that sling ships out of outposts and POS bubles, or did you have some other means of balancing the use of this probe? Please elaborate...
Meina Lamia	Posted - 2008.09.01 03:32:00 - [147] Arent you puting words into peoples mouths here a bit? The issues already discussed are hardly that black and white. About ships and roles, bringing dreads and mining barges (I think you ment them atleas) into this discussion, just shows how desperate you are at finding valid arguments to tip the scale to your favor. Everyone able to fly dreads know, that its about the only ships in game that has but one or two usable roles. But since theres no stopping you then fine. If we follow your logic we could safely say that mining barge shouldnt be able to fit combat drones or any offensive modules to defend itself since its ment to be a mining ship. Was this what you were after? (didnt think so) For the record, Im not against reasonable mechanic to find cloaked ship while they're cloaked. However, most of the suggestions in this thread would gimp cloaks so badly that there would be no using them in the future and that is what I wish to prevent. It's simple really. As long as cloaking ship has to stay in one system (one local) long perionds to reach the advantage that cloak is supposed to offer in the first place, there shouldnt be any means to find them while they're aquiring this advantage. (What would be to point of fitting a cloak without this?) If cloakers are made really invisible (local is disabled as intel tool) then absolutely, there should be something that can reveal a cloaker. Since they have made a move that revealed their precense, it would be only fair that other side gets an opportunity to find this cloaker. Generally speaking, making mechanics that can be disrupted by funktionality of the server cluster (or better yet, the lack of funktionality) is just asking for trouble. (see: "puting few minute timer to keep cloak active in environment that can cause several minutes long delays or drop you completely when you least expect it") Pesonally I don't think I have said anything out of order and for the one gentlemen who doubts what I said about the Sub Hunts. Star Trek gave Cloaking the Popularity it has today, and it was they who said they came up with it to repersent the Sub Hunt feel. No I don't have a link, but I don't have links for Space shuttle lauches or many other things. So either take it on faith or don't. It really doesnt matter for the most part. If Cloaks were only allowed on Cov Ops and Recons it might not be worth mentioning, but since anyone can put one on any war ship, there should be a system where by you can locate them. Only issue I have with that is do to the nature of Gate Camps right now, that could make Cov Ops and Recons useless. Personally I would love to see Cov Ops and Recons and Destroyers be the hunters for Cloaked ships. Let the hunted also be the hunters. Many things are already in place that can make that happen. Such as Sigs and Sensor Strength. Cov Ops would be much harder to find do to small Sig and Recons easier to find then Cov Ops. But in turn Recons have a higher sensor raiding so its easier for them to find cloaked ships then Cov Ops. Anyone else would have to use a Probe Launcher for spotting them. And just because you found them doesnt mean you automaticly reveal them, they still need to take weapons fire from the Cov Op/Recon befor anyone else sees them. Without getting into detail now, there are some great systems for Cloaking already out there which is where I came up with that idea. Game wise, it wouldnt break anything and could only add to it. My concern would be in Coding, I know nothing of Coding so I don't know how much more lag this would create then the standard EW and Probing we have now going on. That would have to be something others more knowledgeable then I to address.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.09.01 06:39:00 - [148] Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja Besides there's nothing wrong in being AFK and cloaked. its the fact that cloakers presence had a purely spychological effect on people that is the actual problem and it's only a problem for people who let it be a problem. (Its all in your heads..) Which again leads to the same old point that everyone would be much happier if they ddint know who is in their local. (If you dont know its there, it cant bother you) It's a problem any time you have a hostile pilot in your area. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make you any safer.
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.09.01 16:35:00 - [149] Edited by: TaatelinTallaaja on 01/09/2008 16:35:34 Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja Besides there's nothing wrong in being AFK and cloaked. its the fact that cloakers presence had a purely spychological effect on people that is the actual problem and it's only a problem for people who let it be a problem. (Its all in your heads..) Which again leads to the same old point that everyone would be much happier if they ddint know who is in their local. (If you dont know its there, it cant bother you) It's a problem any time you have a hostile pilot in your area. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make you any safer. And making a probe that can find cloaker when ever, where ever they happen to be becomes a problem when you are the cloaker in hostile space. You are there to observe or wreck havok, not to dodge probes that are being spammed at you constantly (which will happen as sure as sun will rise, if they add some kind of probe without solving the 'local' -issue). Continuing to ignore this fact wont make the problem go away either. And about "sticking your head into the sand" part... the biggest problem that people in this thread and others like this have stated is the cloakers ability to disrupt their living while they are AFK. Now the main issue is obviously that they KNOW that the cloaker is there, but they have no idea if hes AFK or not. Judging from that, the issue is they need to wonder if hes attacking or not. If they dont know that hes there, there is no problem, since that cloaker is most definately doing nothing while he really is AFK. Now while we can say that "Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make you any safer" and agree that it's true, we can also say that sticking your head in the sand DOES make you feel safer. And feelings are the core thing that people complain about.
Meina Lamia	Posted - 2008.09.02 01:00:00 - [150] From what I have understood, psychology has been as much apart of warfare as the weapons themselves since man could make war. Just knowing a Sub has been in a area has delayed or caused major issues in shipping. Usually escorts would be needed to screen ships and to search for subs along the way. Do to tech of the time they were not very good at it but it kept subs very distracted and on their toes if they wanted a kill. Yes I know Cloaked Ships are not subs, but the differnece is minor at best. For the Cause and Effect are one in the same.
Acidictadpole ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.09.02 17:30:00 - [151] Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja its the fact that cloakers presence had a purely spychological effect on ... spychological.. I like it. Anyway back on topic. The problem with cloaking is there isn't a viable method to remove it from another player that works routinely. And while local is in the game to the degree it is now, there should not be. Everyone tries to compare cloaking to being a submarine and how depth charges and sonar exist to detect them, all fine and dandy but they don't have a local channel to tell them when there is something close to them. If there was a method of detection, it should go to t1 destroyers only. This would bring a use to the class and also prevent everyone from using it. Before I suggest my method for detecting cloaks, I want to emphasize again what effect local has on these ideas, and why it should be removed before anything is done to cloaks. The ability that players have to detect someone else in their system is really overpowered when it comes to a game like this. It can be plausable to have in a place like EVE, but it is not very balanced. If cloaks were able to be "removed" from a cloaking ship, then one would only need to begin activating it while there was an unscannable tango in local for more than 10 seconds. If this took ammo they would just carry tons of it and be undocked without it. But due to the low frequency of which it would be used, that wouldn't be very often. If local were removed, they'd either need a steady escort carrying this detection device on their destroyer constantly pulsing it, and refreshing ammo more frequently or not bother with it and just play with backup. My suggestion would be a high slot smartbomb-like module that can only fit on destroyers ( 10,000 TF and reduced to 10 or so when on a destroyer). Fires a greenish-blue (unique from smartbombs) blast that extends about 20km. 30 second or so activation time. And cap use so that it cannot be enabled forever with lvl 4 cap skills on a base destroyer. It would also grant the same bonuses and penalties as an activated warp field gen (HIC module) with regards to sig radius and MWD / AB reduction simply so that it's not speeding around while firing this thing off.. Only after local is fixed though.. Don't get scammed
TaatelinTallaaja Advanced Tactics and Maneuvers	Posted - 2008.09.02 17:48:00 - [152] Originally by: Acidictadpole Originally by: TaatelinTallaaja its the fact that cloakers presence had a purely spychological effect on ... spychological.. I like it. Thanks for fixing my grammar, noone else does it for me these days [:( Fixed. (though it was kinda funny, now that I actually looked at it) Originally by: Acidictadpole Anyway back on topic. The problem with cloaking is there isn't a viable method to remove it from another player that works routinely. And while local is in the game to the degree it is now, there should not be. Everyone tries to compare cloaking to being a submarine and how depth charges and sonar exist to detect them, all fine and dandy but they don't have a local channel to tell them when there is something close to them. If there was a method of detection, it should go to t1 destroyers only. This would bring a use to the class and also prevent everyone from using it. Before I suggest my method for detecting cloaks, I want to emphasize again what effect local has on these ideas, and why it should be removed before anything is done to cloaks. The ability that players have to detect someone else in their system is really overpowered when it comes to a game like this. It can be plausable to have in a place like EVE, but it is not very balanced. If cloaks were able to be "removed" from a cloaking ship, then one would only need to begin activating it while there was an unscannable tango in local for more than 10 seconds. If this took ammo they would just carry tons of it and be undocked without it. But due to the low frequency of which it would be used, that wouldn't be very often. If local were removed, they'd either need a steady escort carrying this detection device on their destroyer constantly pulsing it, and refreshing ammo more frequently or not bother with it and just play with backup. My suggestion would be a high slot smartbomb-like module that can only fit on destroyers ( 10,000 TF and reduced to 10 or so when on a destroyer). Fires a greenish-blue (unique from smartbombs) blast that extends about 20km. 30 second or so activation time. And cap use so that it cannot be enabled forever with lvl 4 cap skills on a base destroyer. It would also grant the same bonuses and penalties as an activated warp field gen (HIC module) with regards to sig radius and MWD / AB reduction simply so that it's not speeding around while firing this thing off.. Only after local is fixed though.. Yeah, why not. Thats actually not a bad idea. a Lot of similarities with another thread, discussing about T2 destroyer specing for pretty much the same thing. Theres still some work to be done to balance such an idea to be fair for recon(s) that needs to get close in order to work properly (pilgrim). Though, reducing the radius wouldnt be a solution to this since it would be just another smartbomb after that. Could work, or atleast it's better than those "whaaaaah, add buttons and fuel and capuse and gimp them completely, so they cant stay forever" suggestions.
Anig Browl Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.02 18:09:00 - [153] Giving some ability to the (currently under-specified) destroyers would be OK with me and present more of a role for new-ish pilots in destroyers, who are currently told to 'come back when you can fly cruisers'. And I say that as someone largely in favor of the way cloaking works at present. Destroyers with cloaking detectors would work for me as long as the scan/detection time was not instant. 90% of comments here seem to be about the risk from aggressive cloakers who might decloak and then attack. Considering the limitations imposed by cloaks, I'd say there are already significant tradeoffs to using a cloak. Fitting one to a cargo ship as I do does grant a very high level of safety from gankers, but you pay for it with your greatly reduced speed.
TharOkha	Posted - 2008.09.03 10:26:00 - [154] /signed Cloaking is fine. Stop trying to get it nerfed.
Laechyd Eldgorn Caldari Karjala Inc.	Posted - 2008.09.03 21:03:00 - [155] So many people without a clue. People with cloaks fitted still die. Every day. Repeatedly. Seems pretty balanced to me.
Meina Lamia	Posted - 2008.09.03 23:00:00 - [156] Personally I can see Destroyers, Cov Ops and Recons depending on Sensor Raiting, see Cloaked ships 150KM+ out. Now just because you see them doesnt mean you can reveal them at that range, you still need to hit them to reveal them to the rest of the fleet. But the issue I have is for the True Cloakers, I think a Cov Ops cloak should reduce that effective range/probablity of detection. I am don't like the idea of the modual in some ways, its to limited in range and at the same time could be to powerful vs the Cov Ops Cloak. Most issues with Cloakers are either at range or right at a gate camp. So I think the 20KM mod range is just to powerful up close and to weak at range. I still like the idea of a probe combined with the above scanning system, so you can still look for them like looking for ships at Safe Spots. They are still cloaked when you get there but you know the general area and now have to hunt them. So have two methods for looking for them. As for True Cloakers in local, you should probably know that they have entered the system, updates from the star gate would let you know who has entered but after a bit they would fade from local where as the standard and T2 Cloaks you would still know are around. I personally think Cov Ops, Recons, Blackops Battleships should be considered on a seperate system compaired to the Cloaks you can just put on any ship that is not specificly built to cloak.
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2008.09.04 07:14:00 - [157] Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn So many people without a clue. People with cloaks fitted still die. Every day. Repeatedly. Seems pretty balanced to me. Ya can't really fix stupid. Smart people with cloaks rarely, if ever, lose a ship.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.