EVE Search - Maybe Cloaks should use more....

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Maybe Cloaks should use more....

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Janet Marshall Caldari	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:29:00 - [1] Edited by: Janet Marshall on 04/11/2008 22:30:12 Cloaks should increase capacitor usage the longer they are being used. Balance this by using heat to counter the effect...Discuss? Have bonuses for ships like recons and bombers so they can maintain it longer, but i think this is a fair way to get rid of afk claokers.
Uuve Savisaalo Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:34:00 - [2] contrived. cloaking mostly appears to be a problem when used by ships that are not specifically adapted to covert ops cloaks. these ships do pay hefty penalties, but it encourages some behaviour that makes them easy to park and idle for extended periods of time. simplest solution is re-introducing probe-scanning possibility for cloaked ships, with penalties based upon type of cloak used. as a rule, sub-covert ships tend to be greatly slowed down by the cloak even at full speed, and would therefore be unable to idle whilst cloaked in the same manner as they previously could. covert ships would become, though very difficult to, still possible to ping whilst cloaked - especially if immobile and/or afk, thereby making the probe-scanning profession more useful and applicable in the field. burning capacitor/changing mechanic is unnecessary, as it works well for the most part. occam's razor thing, you know, least complexity is always best.
Kuar Z'thain Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:36:00 - [3] Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved!
Janet Marshall Caldari	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:39:00 - [4] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! Im actually the only person in my alliance excited for no local. Its the afk cloakers that **** me hoof.
Kuar Z'thain Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:41:00 - [5] Originally by: Janet Marshall Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! Im actually the only person in my alliance excited for no local. Its the afk cloakers that **** me hoof. But if you had no local.... how would you know that the cloaker is there?
Researcher Qual	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:42:00 - [6] Originally by: Janet Marshall Its the afk cloakers that **** me hoof. why?
Janet Marshall Caldari	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:42:00 - [7] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Originally by: Janet Marshall Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! Im actually the only person in my alliance excited for no local. Its the afk cloakers that **** me hoof. But if you had no local.... how would you know that the cloaker is there? Good point. Still, there needs to be something.
Neesa Corrinne Rogue Shadow Squad Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:47:00 - [8] Getting rid of instant-intelligence 0.0 local would be a big step to making EVE a lot more exiting again. However, I still believe that huge battleships and carriers should be much harder to cloak than the current game design allows for.
Atomos Darksun Infortunatus Eventus Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:51:00 - [9] What people fail to understand about "removing" local is that because 0.0 will not be "safe" anymore, all the carebears will just leave and run level 4 missions in empire. The PvP'ers will remain of course, but probably just as gatecamps and the busters. Not like people like jumping around blindly hours on end. Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Atomos' Guide to Forum Flaming
Maxpie Cross Roads	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:53:00 - [10] I've long thought that cap usage of a cloak should be tied to signature radius. It only makes sense and can solve the "issue" of afk cloakers as they will cap out and lose cloak unless they are in a small ship or a ship designed to be cloaked. He put... creatures... in our bodies... to control our minds. He made us... say lies... do things.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:53:00 - [11] Originally by: Atomos Darksun What people fail to understand about "removing" local is that because 0.0 will not be "safe" anymore, all the carebears will just leave and run level 4 missions in empire. The PvP'ers will remain of course, but probably just as gatecamps and the busters. Not like people like jumping around blindly hours on end. I don't "fail to understand it". I want it for that very reason.
DreadedHunter Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.04 22:58:00 - [12] Edited by: DreadedHunter on 04/11/2008 22:59:49 Dual post :\
DreadedHunter Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.04 23:00:00 - [13] Originally by: Janet Marshall Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Originally by: Janet Marshall Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! Im actually the only person in my alliance excited for no local. Its the afk cloakers that **** me hoof. But if you had no local.... how would you know that the cloaker is there? Good point. Still, there needs to be something. You have to ask politely in local if anyones out there! Personally I believe the penalty for the non cov-op ships cloaking should be some kind of heat build-up which ultimately leads to the cloak failing within 15 mins. i.e. you cant afk them and ultimately they can be scanned down.
Kuar Z'thain Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.04 23:07:00 - [14] Originally by: Atomos Darksun What people fail to understand about "removing" local is that because 0.0 will not be "safe" anymore, all the carebears will just leave and run level 4 missions in empire. The PvP'ers will remain of course, but probably just as gatecamps and the busters. Not like people like jumping around blindly hours on end. I don't think so. Plenty of people will still mine/rat in dead-end pipes, they will just have an alt sitting on a gate further up the pipe watching for gatefires. Remove local and those that are in 0.0 to exploit its resources will still be there. They either adapt, or they die.
Megan Maynard Minmatar Out of Order	Posted - 2008.11.04 23:25:00 - [15] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! THIS. Cloaking ships that aren't specialized cloakers should only be able to do one thing. CLOAK. What's the point of training ships that can cloak if every dumb azz raven in russia land can use them without any kind of penalty? Who care if you take 5 seconds longer to lock a rat. Make the penalty harsh dammit.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.11.05 00:35:00 - [16] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain I don't think so. Plenty of people will still mine/rat in dead-end pipes, they will just have an alt sitting on a gate further up the pipe watching for gatefires. Does not address logonski. Quote: Remove local and those that are in 0.0 to exploit its resources will still be there. They either adapt, or they die. Which is as it should be. Ratters will rat in packs with mult-falcon support, miners... well, miners will rat drones in packs with falcon support. People will adapt and go on with their lives, markets will gyrate wildly and then find new equilibrium.
DreadedHunter Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.05 00:53:00 - [17] Originally by: Clair Bear Ratters will rat in packs with mult-falcon support I doubt that, they/I wouldnt want to suffer the isk/hour loss that would imply. More likely the ratters will rat as at present but with a different ship or ship fittings in order to be able to survive a solo ganker wannabe with a few cloaked spotters placed in strategic locations around the area.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.11.05 00:58:00 - [18] Originally by: DreadedHunter Originally by: Clair Bear Ratters will rat in packs with mult-falcon support I doubt that, they/I wouldnt want to suffer the isk/hour loss that would imply. More likely the ratters will rat as at present but with a different ship or ship fittings in order to be able to survive a solo ganker wannabe with a few cloaked spotters placed in strategic locations around the area. If I still had to rat in 0.0 after local was removed, I'd probably fit a few stabs. Of course, if local was removed with no replacement, I'll probably just go carebear in empire, as a lot of people would...so I don't expect them to do so _____________________ The unofficial faceless Achura alt of EVE Online
Neesa Corrinne Rogue Shadow Squad Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.11.05 03:23:00 - [19] Originally by: Atomos Darksun What people fail to understand about "removing" local is that because 0.0 will not be "safe" anymore, all the carebears will just leave and run level 4 missions in empire. The PvP'ers will remain of course, but probably just as gatecamps and the busters. Not like people like jumping around blindly hours on end. I not only do not "fail to understand" this point, I'm actively for this very change happening. 0.0 isn't a place to go solo. 0.0 is a place for corporations and alliances, not solo ratters or solo miners or anyone who wants to play this game solo. Empire is tailor made for solo players, let the ratters move back.
Gimpb Deathwatch Ltd	Posted - 2008.11.05 14:28:00 - [20] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 04/11/2008 22:37:35 What is wrong with AFK cloakers? Are they scaring you? edit: Wait till Zulupark gets rid of 0.0 local. There, problem solved! Amen, the only problem with cloaks is local lets you know they're there.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.11.05 14:41:00 - [21] Originally by: Neesa Corrinne I not only do not "fail to understand" this point, I'm actively for this very change happening. 0.0 isn't a place to go solo. 0.0 is a place for corporations and alliances, not solo ratters or solo miners or anyone who wants to play this game solo. Empire is tailor made for solo players, let the ratters move back. And then everyone gets mopey because all the roaming gang targets have packed up and gone to carebear in empire. A local nerf would allow small gangs to better evade larger gangs at the cost of utterly obliterating their last source of targets _____________________ The unofficial faceless Achura alt of EVE Online
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.11.05 14:44:00 - [22] Originally by: Uuve Savisaalo contrived. cloaking mostly appears to be a problem when used by ships that are not specifically adapted to covert ops cloaks. And by ships designed to use covert ops cloaks - aside from covops frigs which are fine. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
eliminator2 Gallente Heretic Army Heretic Nation	Posted - 2008.11.05 14:46:00 - [23] the thing with afk cloaks is that it makes more lag because more people are logged on it might not seem it i mean wat are they doing just sat there cloaked but you think the cloak cycles have to go through the server the cap recharge and take away has to do same and im sure there are other things so buy getting ride of afk cloakers were helping the server out :)
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.05 14:52:00 - [24] Edited by: FlameGlow on 05/11/2008 14:52:58 Ah, I leave my SB cloaked in system for whole days, and pop up occasionaly when targets get careless to undock and rat. How else are we supposed to drive unwanted neighbours out of 0.0 NPC space if not by psychological warfare? Please keep local, I so enjoy knowing ppl shaking in fear to undock even at the time I sleep _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2008.11.05 15:07:00 - [25] Originally by: eliminator2 the thing with afk cloaks is that it makes more lag because more people are logged on it might not seem it i mean wat are they doing just sat there cloaked but you think the cloak cycles have to go through the server the cap recharge and take away has to do same and im sure there are other things so buy getting ride of afk cloakers were helping the server out :) Punctuation. Use. It. Please. Extremely. Annoying. To. Read. What. You. Try. To. Say. Ok? Also, you fail miserably. What puts load on servers is activity. Someone sitting AFK in a cloak isn't really making things lag more. Well I guess I'm biased. Last 4-5 days I've been floating cloaked non-stop in different low sec systems. It's quite funny to see people in local talk to me, I'm not responding. Noone will know if I'm there or not, nor what ship I'm in. But yah you betcha I see you. Why I'm doing it? Because it annoys people, puts them at unease, and makes life more dangerous to them. "AFK"-cloaking ftw. Meanwhile I'm playing my alts, shooting players and npcs, while Misanth brings me some extra joy. I play EVE to have fun, cloaking nonstop brings it. Yeeehaaaaw!
Black Tahee1	Posted - 2008.11.05 15:23:00 - [26] AFK cloaking works as intented kthnxbyebye
Highwind Cid	Posted - 2008.11.05 16:06:00 - [27] Originally by: Uuve Savisaalo covert ships would become, though very difficult to, still possible to ping whilst cloaked - especially if immobile and/or afk Actually shouldn't it be easier to find a immobile stealthed object rather than a moving one. This would be realistic but also help locate afk cloakers as well. It just seems to make more sense.
Dr Slaughter Minmatar Rabies Inc.	Posted - 2008.11.05 16:49:00 - [28] Interesting idea you have there. Most original, but, what about if being docked cost ISK per minute? Or sitting in POS shields stopped skill training? ~~~~ There is no parody in this thread. Honest.
Faife Noctiscion	Posted - 2008.11.05 17:00:00 - [29] you kids swear there wont be a way to detect people at gates after local i expect proximity sensors. as soon as it goes off, head to your safe spot and log off that char, log in your next -- Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Dikanal	Posted - 2008.11.05 17:07:00 - [30] All I know is that when this local nerf happens I am going to loling my face off when the "yarr nerf local now! kill ratters pew pew yarr" turn into whines about "cant find targets" and "we went 20 jumps and didn't even know if someone was there waaggh".

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.