Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
D3F4ULT
113
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 22:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
The cloaking mechanic is great in EVE Online, but the one and only draw back is there's is no equal counter. The method to cloaking is very simple while the counter shouldn't be so simple.
It still allows active cloaking game play and strategy within the realm of actual computer attendance.
The scanning of a ship should still be possible, warp in point of 25km-50km area, but you can't see the ship on overview, just only able to scan its general direction. It's the same tool that cloakers get to use on their prey so it should be just as effective in searching them.
inb4 new and innovating idea.
It's just really disappointing to see this forever unbalanced by unattended computers, which I could theoretically call it botting because the Player isn't playing but the computer still poses the threat of existence. Creator of CCP ZULU - Incarna : Pants Online ( http://youtu.be/AObrlCf3Dcs ) |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
388
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 22:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
D3F4ULT wrote:The cloaking mechanic is great in EVE Online, but the one and only draw back is there's is no equal counter. The method to cloaking is very simple while the counter shouldn't be so simple.
It still allows active cloaking game play and strategy within the realm of actual computer attendance.
The scanning of a ship should still be possible, warp in point of 25km-50km area, but you can't see the ship on overview, just only able to scan its general direction. It's the same tool that cloakers get to use on their prey so it should be just as effective in searching them.
inb4 new and innovating idea.
It's just really disappointing to see this forever unbalanced by unattended computers, which I could theoretically call it botting because the Player isn't playing but the computer still poses the threat of existence.
The need for AFK cloaking is directly related to the Omniscient local chat being used as a risk-imbalancing Intel tool....
Any suggestion that allows you to remove AFK cloakers from your system simultaneously enables you to create a completely, risk free nullsec environment. This is just not appropriate, and unless you simultaneously address the issue of local chat being used as a perfect pilot identification tool, your suggestion will be vehemently opposed...
|
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
894
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 23:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
The problem is, any attempts to limit the effectiveness of the inactive players, aside from forced logoffs, is guaranteed to hurt active player more. |
Viktor Fyretracker
Emminent Terraforming
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 23:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
I think the only way to really allow scanning down of cloaked vessels would be to have something that in sec status less than .1 space you no longer appear in local while cloaked. you counter this "buff" to cloaking with maybe the excuse that you have to shut off your normal subspace transmitter and as such the cloaked pilot also cannot see local while cloaked.(they can still talk to their corp channel of course, no sense in attacking that channel since well the major corps all likely have vent/ts/mumble anyway).
Basically its allow limited but highly inaccurate locating of cloaked ships(think WW2 ASW warfare, mostly hit or miss).
But cloaked pilots do not show on local, and a side effect is that the person who is cloaked also cannot see local. Naturally nothing stops them from parking 300km from a POS and reporting the overview results. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
389
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 00:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Viktor Fyretracker wrote:I think the only way to really allow scanning down of cloaked vessels would be to have something that in sec status less than .1 space you no longer appear in local while cloaked. you counter this "buff" to cloaking with maybe the excuse that you have to shut off your normal subspace transmitter and as such the cloaked pilot also cannot see local while cloaked.(they can still talk to their corp channel of course, no sense in attacking that channel since well the major corps all likely have vent/ts/mumble anyway).
Basically its allow limited but highly inaccurate locating of cloaked ships(think WW2 ASW warfare, mostly hit or miss).
But cloaked pilots do not show on local, and a side effect is that the person who is cloaked also cannot see local. Naturally nothing stops them from parking 300km from a POS and reporting the overview results.
This is too strong a boost to cloaks....
1.) I come into system (WH, Gate, Log on) and cloak... Noone will know I'm there, and I just do periodic sweeps of the system to find targets... Additionally, why would anyone use an interceptor anymore?? I'd use a SB... just come into system, get a quick glance at local, and cloak... the locals get a whole 5 seconds or less to notice I've come into system, after which I have all the time in the world to hunt them down, tackle them, and bring in friends...
I firmly believe it is important for both the hunter and the hunted to quickly know there is a potential threat in system.... To balance this, I'd hide information on the "potential threat" until you actively get intel on it. In other words, you would know there is a new pilot in system, but you would NOT know if the new pilot was an ally or not... To determine their identity, I'd want an intel tool..... not local chat... Then you can have probing for cloakers... |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
400
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 00:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
Solution to AFK cloaking is removing Local Chat Intel. |
Jackal Datapaw
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
23
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 06:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
The term on AFK cloaking is broken, in truth, no cloaker is truely AFK, he only chooses, when, and how he wishes to attack, thus, this is what creates the fear. The AFK cloaking term is broken logic, this logic requires a fix.
Just like how everything else about cloaking requires fixing. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7460
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 07:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
D3F4ULT wrote:The cloaking mechanic is great in EVE Online, but the one and only draw back is there's is no equal counter. The method to cloaking is very simple while the counter shouldn't be so simple.
It still allows active cloaking game play and strategy within the realm of actual computer attendance.
The scanning of a ship should still be possible, warp in point of 25km-50km area, but you can't see the ship on overview, just only able to scan its general direction. It's the same tool that cloakers get to use on their prey so it should be just as effective in searching them.
inb4 new and innovating idea.
It's just really disappointing to see this forever unbalanced by unattended computers, which I could theoretically call it botting because the Player isn't playing but the computer still poses the threat of existence.
As already said, your idea is nothing new and in fact breaks the balance, far in the favour of those who want to rat/mine etc.
You ask for balance, when by it's very nature cloaks are balanced. Not only that, but the fact that you can see them in local channel, already gives you the edge as far as that balance is concerned.
The issue you seem to have is their subvertion of your 100% risk free intel tool, by making the instant part of it hard to comprehend and read. That's not the fault of cloaks, as can be seen by the fact that you can AFK in a system without a cloak and still gain the same psychological effects. The problem you and every other cloak whiner has, is your over reliance upon local intel channels instant intel.
And no, you cannot theoretically call it botting, that is ridiculous.
The difference between local and AFKing, is that local is guaranteed to work 23.5/7, whereas AFKing is not.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
298
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 08:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
Attempt to break wormholes #5645824453454545. |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 08:20:00 -
[10] - Quote
D3F4ULT wrote:The cloaking mechanic is great in EVE Online, but the one and only draw back is there's is no equal counter. The method to cloaking is very simple while the counter shouldn't be so simple.
You are talking about cloaking as it was a sort of e-war which needs counters etc.
In fact, it is not.
|
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
767
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 09:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
I'd like the point out that the ships designed to make use of Covert-ops cloaks are "weaker" combat-wise compared to their T1 counterparts.
Stealth Bombers are hard pressed to fit any semblance of a tank... and are VERY ineffective against small fast ships and drones.
Force Recons generally suffer from poor mobility, poor tank, or poor DPS... or some combination of the three.
Cloaking capable T3s generally suffer from poor mobility or poor DPS.
The "counter" to cloaks is built in to the ships themselves. The only reason that battleships and haulers die to solo Stealth Bombers in 0.0 space is because people idiotically min/max their fits (leaving them weak against everything BUT what they are fitting themselves to do) and/or don't take precautions to negate a possible threat.
With regards to Cynos and covert cynos... they are completely different mechanic that should be addressed separately. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |