EVE Search - Nerf the CLOAKS

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Nerf the CLOAKS

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tigersbane	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:48:00 - [211] Quote: - Do the long term solution, delaying the patch, having the exploit in the open until that and not able to deploy all the fixes With the greatest respect Oveur, Why does one preclude the other? Might I remind you of the "malfunctioning sentry guns incidents" Remember when it was publicised on the boards, on the blogs and on the ingame news, that shooting players within site of the malfunctioning gates was considered an exploit and would be dealt with appropriately Why can this exploitable situation not be handled in the same manner. I know you have to do something, but for the love of all that is holy, and the reaction raised by the vast majority of the posts on this thread alone, why do you have to make the mod completely useless Roll out the patch as scheduled, stick warnings about the consequences of sneaking up on smartbomb users all over the news, the boards and the blogs and carry on from there. We beg you to think again more carefully about the solution.
Tigersbane	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:48:00 - [212] Quote: - Do the long term solution, delaying the patch, having the exploit in the open until that and not able to deploy all the fixes With the greatest respect Oveur, Why does one preclude the other? Might I remind you of the "malfunctioning sentry guns incidents" Remember when it was publicised on the boards, on the blogs and on the ingame news, that shooting players within site of the malfunctioning gates was considered an exploit and would be dealt with appropriately Why can this exploitable situation not be handled in the same manner. I know you have to do something, but for the love of all that is holy, and the reaction raised by the vast majority of the posts on this thread alone, why do you have to make the mod completely useless Roll out the patch as scheduled, stick warnings about the consequences of sneaking up on smartbomb users all over the news, the boards and the blogs and carry on from there. We beg you to think again more carefully about the solution.
Origim	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:52:00 - [213] Edited by: Origim on 02/07/2004 16:53:07 Yeah. Just tell us that you will fix the cloak code and reverse the 10k penalty to 1k penalty within a month (or sooner) after the patch. -------------- Posting Efficiency / Rank 1 / SP: 68542 of 256000 \|
Origim	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:52:00 - [214] Edited by: Origim on 02/07/2004 16:53:07 Yeah. Just tell us that you will fix the cloak code and reverse the 10k penalty to 1k penalty within a month (or sooner) after the patch. -------------- Posting Efficiency / Rank 1 / SP: 68542 of 256000 \|
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:53:00 - [215] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 16:55:52 Q: Has anyone been a victim of this exploit? Is it just hypothetical? Why would taking time to fix this problem, take time from fixing all other problems, and delay a patch? Just leave this fix out of the patch, and go ahead with the other fixes. A: No one knows. I dont care when the cloaks will be fixed back to the 1km, why isnt the administrative side taking care of exploits untill they are CORRECTLY fixed?
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:53:00 - [216] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 16:55:52 Q: Has anyone been a victim of this exploit? Is it just hypothetical? Why would taking time to fix this problem, take time from fixing all other problems, and delay a patch? Just leave this fix out of the patch, and go ahead with the other fixes. A: No one knows. I dont care when the cloaks will be fixed back to the 1km, why isnt the administrative side taking care of exploits untill they are CORRECTLY fixed?
Bad Harlequin	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:56:00 - [217] Originally by: Oveur This is done to prevent an exploit situation with cloaks, where the victim gets CONCORDOKENED. I'll explain the exploit when the patch has been deployed. So in other words yet ANOTHER system nerfed due to the crappy, ill-conceived, utterly useless CONCORD system, because we'd rather die then admit to the ill-conceived utterly useless nature of the CONCORD system. You are in a maze of twisty little asteroids, all alike.
Bad Harlequin	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:56:00 - [218] Originally by: Oveur This is done to prevent an exploit situation with cloaks, where the victim gets CONCORDOKENED. I'll explain the exploit when the patch has been deployed. So in other words yet ANOTHER system nerfed due to the crappy, ill-conceived, utterly useless CONCORD system, because we'd rather die then admit to the ill-conceived utterly useless nature of the CONCORD system. You are in a maze of twisty little asteroids, all alike.
fairimear	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:59:00 - [219] Come on i know ur reading gm/devs lets get some answers to how long this nerfs gona be on cloaks. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
fairimear	Posted - 2004.07.02 16:59:00 - [220] Come on i know ur reading gm/devs lets get some answers to how long this nerfs gona be on cloaks. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
Killgorde	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:01:00 - [221] Originally by: Oveur If you call increasing the uncloak range an kneejerk, I don't know what removing them altogether would be Err - isn't rendering them totally obsolete as a viable piece of equipment the same as removing them altogether, Oveur? Because that, judging by reaction in the 5 pages above to the proposed increase, is exactly what you are doing. You may as well remove them, because a 10km decloak range (or even 7km) makes them pretty useless (and extremely bloody risky to use). If the exploit is CONCORD related, make the bloody things inactive in Empire, but don't nerf them to hell and gone for the PvP guys if the exploit does not apply to 0.0 space. WTF would anyone need cloaking in Empire anyway - official corp wars aside? CCP have done so many "kneejerks" like this since release, I for one thought they had the word copyrighted, although to be fair you have been reasonably sensible since Castor - until now. Originally by: Oveur And you honestly believe that banning cloaks in Empire would cause less uproar than this change? I didn't go that way because I thought it would create riots. I'm sure if you actually *asked* the community (make a change that) whether they would prefer a) cloaking device use being restricted to low security space, or b) nerfed to the degree where they are only worthwhile for PvE, you might be amazed to find a distinct lack of rioting. Go on, take the plunge and ask them Killgorde CEO - Cutting Edge Incorporated "I thought I saw a light at the end of the tunnel but it turned out to be some bastard with a torch in one hand and a ****load more work for me in the other"
Killgorde	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:01:00 - [222] Originally by: Oveur If you call increasing the uncloak range an kneejerk, I don't know what removing them altogether would be Err - isn't rendering them totally obsolete as a viable piece of equipment the same as removing them altogether, Oveur? Because that, judging by reaction in the 5 pages above to the proposed increase, is exactly what you are doing. You may as well remove them, because a 10km decloak range (or even 7km) makes them pretty useless (and extremely bloody risky to use). If the exploit is CONCORD related, make the bloody things inactive in Empire, but don't nerf them to hell and gone for the PvP guys if the exploit does not apply to 0.0 space. WTF would anyone need cloaking in Empire anyway - official corp wars aside? CCP have done so many "kneejerks" like this since release, I for one thought they had the word copyrighted, although to be fair you have been reasonably sensible since Castor - until now. Originally by: Oveur And you honestly believe that banning cloaks in Empire would cause less uproar than this change? I didn't go that way because I thought it would create riots. I'm sure if you actually *asked* the community (make a change that) whether they would prefer a) cloaking device use being restricted to low security space, or b) nerfed to the degree where they are only worthwhile for PvE, you might be amazed to find a distinct lack of rioting. Go on, take the plunge and ask them Killgorde CEO - Cutting Edge Incorporated "I thought I saw a light at the end of the tunnel but it turned out to be some bastard with a torch in one hand and a ****load more work for me in the other"
Thrak	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:01:00 - [223] Originally by: Neorocke Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 16:14:36 like oveur said, it has nothing to do with smartbombs. Plus, if you were truly at war with them, if the smartbomb hit you, there wouldnt be any consequences. Well a) you're wrong, it is about smartbombs and b) that's not the problem, it's the same as when people used to have noob frigs fly near them to catch missile splash. The problem amounts to people smartbombing with a cloaked ship within smartbomb range, or possibly someone waiting for them to smartbomb then uncloaking within that range before the player using the smartbomb can halt it. Temporary/player solution (I would say) don't use smartbombs in >0.4 and not in view of sentries. Which is a good rule to follow anyway. Obviously idiots have chosen to forget common sense, hence petitions are made and this 'exploit' is in circulation. Finalised fix, change it so that smartbombing a cloaked ship is not a hostile act, and have that immunity from smartbomb aggression extend a further 30 seconds after decloak. Wow that took 30 seconds. And if you can't code that in, its your look out - stop being lazy.
Thrak	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:01:00 - [224] Originally by: Neorocke Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 16:14:36 like oveur said, it has nothing to do with smartbombs. Plus, if you were truly at war with them, if the smartbomb hit you, there wouldnt be any consequences. Well a) you're wrong, it is about smartbombs and b) that's not the problem, it's the same as when people used to have noob frigs fly near them to catch missile splash. The problem amounts to people smartbombing with a cloaked ship within smartbomb range, or possibly someone waiting for them to smartbomb then uncloaking within that range before the player using the smartbomb can halt it. Temporary/player solution (I would say) don't use smartbombs in >0.4 and not in view of sentries. Which is a good rule to follow anyway. Obviously idiots have chosen to forget common sense, hence petitions are made and this 'exploit' is in circulation. Finalised fix, change it so that smartbombing a cloaked ship is not a hostile act, and have that immunity from smartbomb aggression extend a further 30 seconds after decloak. Wow that took 30 seconds. And if you can't code that in, its your look out - stop being lazy.
James McGowen	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:02:00 - [225] So, we have two options: 1 No Cloaks in empire space. 2 A cloak that nobody will use anywhere (Well, someone will think of some use before long I'm sure). I think I'd rather only be able to use them in 0.0 (temporarily). Then again, I do live there. ---------------------------------------- "To err is human" To really foul up requires a computer.
James McGowen	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:02:00 - [226] So, we have two options: 1 No Cloaks in empire space. 2 A cloak that nobody will use anywhere (Well, someone will think of some use before long I'm sure). I think I'd rather only be able to use them in 0.0 (temporarily). Then again, I do live there. ---------------------------------------- "To err is human" To really foul up requires a computer.
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:02:00 - [227] Originally by: Sally If you do not have the imagination how to use a cloak, then simply don't use it. I think the fact Sally thinks the 10km range is ok says it all. I agree. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:02:00 - [228] Originally by: Sally If you do not have the imagination how to use a cloak, then simply don't use it. I think the fact Sally thinks the 10km range is ok says it all. I agree. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:03:00 - [229] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 17:07:49 they are waiting to see exactly how big this is going to get. We need to turn this issue into a precedent of stopping quick game nerfs. Please. On the other side, with just oveur responding, and the number of posts that this topic has gathered, we might have struck a nerve and caused an emergency meeting. btw i was stating what oveur said about it not being the smartbombs...
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:03:00 - [230] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 17:07:49 they are waiting to see exactly how big this is going to get. We need to turn this issue into a precedent of stopping quick game nerfs. Please. On the other side, with just oveur responding, and the number of posts that this topic has gathered, we might have struck a nerve and caused an emergency meeting. btw i was stating what oveur said about it not being the smartbombs...
Cookie	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:04:00 - [231] cure the sickness, not the syptoms.
Cookie	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:04:00 - [232] cure the sickness, not the syptoms.
fairimear	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:07:00 - [233] Edited by: fairimear on 02/07/2004 17:11:09 No no nerf in sec space, just fix totaly fix this problem. ie no 5-10km decloak and no exploit within 2-3 weeks and we will forgive u. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
fairimear	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:07:00 - [234] Edited by: fairimear on 02/07/2004 17:11:09 No no nerf in sec space, just fix totaly fix this problem. ie no 5-10km decloak and no exploit within 2-3 weeks and we will forgive u. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:07:00 - [235] Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:07:00 - [236] Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:12:00 - [237] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 17:15:18 Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? uh heh, probably because the fact that you are playing into everyone elses hands, cant you see that the basis of any cloak, is not just limited to scouting options? GEE what would any nation in the world do with the ability to cloak something....... i wonder... remember, they use the state of the world to get some ideas... plus... not to mention birds of "freakin" prey... come on, cloaking is offensive, the way ccp has it setup is not offensive, but they should not limit it to just scouting. I could care less about it not being offensive, but there are limitless possibilities for cloaking. To add insult to injury, if you warped in onto a blockade with a CO ship, and cloaked right away, anything could just mwd to your respectable area and use drones and find you before you could even get away... Moreso at 60km and with the 10km decloak.... thats just self explanatory... with the 1km, you had a chance.
Neorocke	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:12:00 - [238] Edited by: Neorocke on 02/07/2004 17:15:18 Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? uh heh, probably because the fact that you are playing into everyone elses hands, cant you see that the basis of any cloak, is not just limited to scouting options? GEE what would any nation in the world do with the ability to cloak something....... i wonder... remember, they use the state of the world to get some ideas... plus... not to mention birds of "freakin" prey... come on, cloaking is offensive, the way ccp has it setup is not offensive, but they should not limit it to just scouting. I could care less about it not being offensive, but there are limitless possibilities for cloaking. To add insult to injury, if you warped in onto a blockade with a CO ship, and cloaked right away, anything could just mwd to your respectable area and use drones and find you before you could even get away... Moreso at 60km and with the 10km decloak.... thats just self explanatory... with the 1km, you had a chance.
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:14:00 - [239] Originally by: Neorocke Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? uh heh, probably because the fact that you are playing into everyone elses hands, cant you see that the basis of any cloak, is not just limited to scouting options? GEE what would any nation in the world do with the ability to cloak something....... i wonder... remember, they use the state of the world to get some ideas... plus... not to mention birds of "freakin" prey... come on, cloaking is offensive, the way ccp has it setup is not offensive, but they should not limit it to just scouting. I could care less about it not being offensive, but there are limitless possibilities for cloaking. Nice rhetoric but it's pretty much meaningless drivel. All this thread has is "Oh no, 10km is TOO far" without anyone actually saying why. Tell me. Why do you want to use cloaking? The real reason. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.07.02 17:14:00 - [240] Originally by: Neorocke Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 02/07/2004 17:09:32 Cloaking is a scouting/recon unit by nature. It's not really maeant for offensive actions. You can see as much from 10km as 60km so all the whining about the increased range seems rather silly. Why is the 10km range so different to the 1km one? uh heh, probably because the fact that you are playing into everyone elses hands, cant you see that the basis of any cloak, is not just limited to scouting options? GEE what would any nation in the world do with the ability to cloak something....... i wonder... remember, they use the state of the world to get some ideas... plus... not to mention birds of "freakin" prey... come on, cloaking is offensive, the way ccp has it setup is not offensive, but they should not limit it to just scouting. I could care less about it not being offensive, but there are limitless possibilities for cloaking. Nice rhetoric but it's pretty much meaningless drivel. All this thread has is "Oh no, 10km is TOO far" without anyone actually saying why. Tell me. Why do you want to use cloaking? The real reason. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.