Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hiro Apropos
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 11:39:00 -
[1]
As stated, this game needs cloak busters. Once a ship is cloaked its a 'haha I'm safe button'. No place in Eve is safe. Lets keep it that way eh?
My personal idea is to allow ECM burst module to disrupt the cloaking effect even if only for the duration of the burst (so short short). Damage isnt needed, just something to drop them out of cloak long enough to point a direction.
Secondary idea is to make it an ECM Burst Module that is Destroyer only, giving these poor guys a greater role, as, ftmp they are relegated to salvaging in missions and minor (and I mean minor) roles against small frigs.
Open to opinions folks, but lets keep it constructive eh? The NEW M.Corp Data Hub - Check it out! |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 11:44:00 -
[2]
no.
This would make cloaks obsolete. No covert ship would then be able to pass a gatecamp what that ships are supposed for, think about cloaker transport ships for instance, without cloak they are pointless.
Cloak is supposed to prevent ships from being discovered, its working and its fine as it is.
|
Hiro Apropos
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 15:29:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Robert Caldera no.
This would make cloaks obsolete. No covert ship would then be able to pass a gatecamp what that ships are supposed for, think about cloaker transport ships for instance, without cloak they are pointless.
Cloak is supposed to prevent ships from being discovered, its working and its fine as it is.
No, you miss my point, and no, it would not make the ships pointless.
What I am stating is a 'blink' mode when you cloak. This doesnt knock your cloak out, keep you from warping, or anything of the sort, AND it would require an ECM burst to be used by a ship , AND it being pulsed to even get the blink.
Currently , when you jump through a gate, you have to uncloak briefly anyways. However the time in between these two is so short that you cant even get a direction , neverless a lock. This is as it should be. BUT: there needs to be a counter. It should NOT uncloak the person permanently, it should not keep them from warping, it SHOULD just give a brief indication of where the target is. You STILL will have to go to the location of the target to uncloak it and lock it, and the target will STILL have time to disappear.
If you think a change like this would have everyone and their brothers running to ECM bursts (with the limited range they have) you dont realize how many lazy pvp'ers there are |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 15:45:00 -
[4]
No. Cloak is already balanced. |
Verloc Nostromo
Black Mesa LEGION.
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 16:18:00 -
[5]
Ecm burst? Why? Use a smart bomb, it has aoe and will decloak a cloaked ship inside its range. |
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 16:24:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Verloc Nostromo Ecm burst? Why? Use a smart bomb, it has aoe and will decloak a cloaked ship inside its range.
Actualy no, aoe does not decloak but can kill cloaked boat ;p |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 16:41:00 -
[7]
Well it wouldn't prevent anything because the cloaked ship can just warp away. I like the specialized ship idea though.
If you're up against a fleet of cloaked recons or stealth bombers this would be great. Would be even better if you could make that ship visible to the "pinging" destroyer only, but I don't think current DB and game mechanics will allow that. |
DelboyTrotter
Trotters Independent Trading
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 17:17:00 -
[8]
This is a well needed idea, but needs some refining:
Any cloak breaking method / module should NOT effect covert cloaks i.e. covert frigates, recons, and bombers would be immune. These ships are supposed to cloak and should always be safe. Its cloaking ravens / capitals that are imbalanced.
Use a probing based method to decloak / find non covert cloaking ships. This should be easy to introduce and would make it interesting to achieve.. also if based upon current ship probing mechanics, would mean that a cloaked frigate would be harder to find than a cloaked BS.
my 2c. |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 17:19:00 -
[9]
Cloak breakers would become standard equipment at every gate camp. 0.0 bubble camps would become unbeatable. Bubble camps don't need a boost. |
Kaylan Jahlar
Minmatar Minmatar Industrial Limited
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 17:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Hiro Apropos As stated, this game needs cloak busters. Once a ship is cloaked its a 'haha I'm safe button'. No place in Eve is safe. Lets keep it that way eh?
My personal idea is to allow ECM burst module to disrupt the cloaking effect even if only for the duration of the burst (so short short). Damage isnt needed, just something to drop them out of cloak long enough to point a direction.
Secondary idea is to make it an ECM Burst Module that is Destroyer only, giving these poor guys a greater role, as, ftmp they are relegated to salvaging in missions and minor (and I mean minor) roles against small frigs.
Open to opinions folks, but lets keep it constructive eh?
No way Jose! Doing that would pretty much render Covert Ops ships useless in their role, and since Im currently training for Stealth Bombers as my speciality, I say a big NO to this. |
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 17:53:00 -
[11]
No.
Cloak is its own counter on non coverts especially.
Cloaked ships cant warp ( excp coverts ) Cloaked ships cant move very fast ( excp coverts / black ops ) Cloaked ships cant fire weapons ( no exceptions ) Cloaked ships cant use electronic warfare ( no exceptions ) Cloaked ships cant repair themselves ( excp passive shield regen ) Cloaked ships cant lock targets for a long time after decloaking and then only slowly.
If a cloaked ship cant even hold its cloak because someone else pressed a button there would be no point in having them in game.
"You're the kind of people who would complain about the power of the queen if you played chess." Abulurd Boniface
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 18:37:00 -
[12]
Where's the crumplecorn signature when you need it. |
Bibbleibble
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 18:42:00 -
[13]
Why not give non-covops cloak a 1 hour cycle time, which auto repeats, and then making this anti-cloak module stop it on its next cloak cycle? That would mean that if a cloaker is paying any attention at all, then they will be uncatchable, whilst if they are not, then you can catch them.
On the other hand, cloaks are perfectly balanced at the moment, so no measures are needed to counter them. |
Kaylan Jahlar
Minmatar Minmatar Industrial Limited
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 19:01:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Bibbleibble Why not give non-covops cloak a 1 hour cycle time, which auto repeats, and then making this anti-cloak module stop it on its next cloak cycle? That would mean that if a cloaker is paying any attention at all, then they will be uncatchable, whilst if they are not, then you can catch them.
On the other hand, cloaks are perfectly balanced at the moment, so no measures are needed to counter them.
Leave cloaking alone, it's perfectly well balanced as it is. Cloaking is just a part of EVE now, so get used to it. |
AtheistOfDoom
Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 20:40:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri No. Cloak is already balanced.
|
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 08:14:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Hiro Apropos As stated, this game needs cloak busters.
Stated by whom? For what reason? What problem are you trying to solve?
The reason your thread has a whole series of 'cloaking is balanced' replies is because you've failed to answer the above questions. As far as I can see, cloaking has loads of drawbacks for the advantages gained, and seems very well balanced.
If, as implied by your subsequent post, your concern is that as a person comes out of auto-cloak at a gate, and begins to align/move off, they cloak, and you can't find them, then lets focus on that.
The usual retorts to that problem are that you don't have the necessary numbers to camp properly e.g. interceptors to burn to the rough direction of the target, or lots of ships with drones out. Gatecamps are not supposed to be automatic 'I win' buttons any more than cloaks are supposed to be.
If the people camping are skilled, they will decloak the intended target. If they are not, and the person cloaked is skilled, they will fail to decloak the intended target. That sounds very balanced to me, and exactly how the game should play - player skill determines success.
The alternative is a technological arms race where both sides of the coin lobby for new and better tools to detect & evade, and whilst a fascinating design problem and great for the industrial side of the game, one might question the validity of such a race. |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 11:29:00 -
[17]
*Digs through the forum* Found it !
Proximity Projection Pulse
It's old, it's locked, it's from a time when you actually got a constructive discussion about your ideas. |
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 12:04:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth The usual retorts to that problem are that you don't have the necessary numbers to camp properly e.g. interceptors to burn to the rough direction of the target, or lots of ships with drones out. Gatecamps are not supposed to be automatic 'I win' buttons any more than cloaks are supposed to be.
If the people camping are skilled, they will decloak the intended target. If they are not, and the person cloaked is skilled, they will fail to decloak the intended target. That sounds very balanced to me, and exactly how the game should play - player skill determines success.
This. |
jagoff
Cosmic Cakes
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 15:40:00 -
[19]
it's easy to de-cloak someone, swarm their last known location with everyone's drones out. i've seen this work more times than it fails.
|
Aston Vette
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 18:33:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Aston Vette on 13/06/2009 18:33:09 This kind of thing could have its benefits. There have been many many many times when I've been trying to find someone in system who is obviously ratting but can't because they are cloaked, and will be forever. In this situation there isn't balance, because no matter what I do, what skills I have, or how long I look, there is virtually no chance of finding the cloaked ship.
As far as drawbacks go, cloaks are easy to fit on anything and the only real penalty is that they interfere with your targetting systems. I know you can't warp with a Proto or Improved, but as long as no one visually saw you cloak, then it doesn't much matter.
I don't think a Prototype cloak - which only takes about a week to train for - should allow someone to sit safely in a system forever.
I think the best idea presented so far is to use the probing mechanism (think "sub-space probes" that ONLY find cloaked ships). And I think that Cov-Ops cloaks should be immune to it. That way finding a cloaked non-covops would require some time, skills, and player abilities - but it COULD be done.
|
|
Hagir Bethul
|
Posted - 2009.06.13 19:02:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Aston Vette Edited by: Aston Vette on 13/06/2009 18:33:09 This kind of thing could have its benefits. There have been many many many times when I've been trying to find someone in system who is obviously ratting but can't because they are cloaked, and will be forever. In this situation there isn't balance, because no matter what I do, what skills I have, or how long I look, there is virtually no chance of finding the cloaked ship.
So you can't do anything and the other guy can't do anything either. Yet for some strange reason you want the system changed in such a way that you can do something (find the other guy) while the other guy still can't do anything. And that idea is supposed to be balanced in some way? Yeah, right
|
Smash Rex
|
Posted - 2009.06.14 01:23:00 -
[22]
Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with the way that cloaks (especially covops) affect the running of gatecamps etc. What I would like to see is a way to scan down ships regardless of cloaks. Make it a script or something (like the superpoints for HICs) that allow probes to pick up cloaked ships at the expense of a scan penalty. This would serve to leave the majority of uses for cloaking as they are but would require covops pilots who sit and collect info to actually work a bit for what they get instead of having the 'safe button' that covops cloaking resembles once you're already in system. I don't think asking a covops ship to change their safespot occasionally or run the risk of getting found out is an unbalancing factor, and would require their pilots to pay attention.
And all of you who are saying that cloaks are fine the way they are: most of you sound exactly like all those falcon pilots who claimed that ecm wasn't overpowered as they completely shut down a fleet from 150km off a gate. I think most of us can agree that covops are not overpowered to the extent that ecm was. That doesn't mean that they're not overpowered for their role. |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.06.14 02:00:00 -
[23]
We should remove stations from the game. A ship in the station is safe and that's just not fair to the rest of us. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic |
Hagir Bethul
|
Posted - 2009.06.14 09:55:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Smash Rex
And all of you who are saying that cloaks are fine the way they are: most of you sound exactly like all those falcon pilots who claimed that ecm wasn't overpowered as they completely shut down a fleet from 150km off a gate.
This is just stupid, because the only thing a cloak can shut down in some way is the ship it has been fitted on. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |