Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sentient Blade
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:04:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Umega A cloaky can't do this, a cloaky can't do that
No, it has to wait a whole half second after uncloaking to do them, by which point it's too late and you're screwed because the person uncloaking has already waited until they know they can win, and then done it.
I can grasp this fact quite easily having only been down in nullsec a few months. Which leads me to think you're deliberately ignoring the game balance problem because it works to your advantage.
|
Hannibal Ord
Minmatar Hannibals Commando's
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:14:00 -
[182]
One doesn't stop going to the bar or clubbing because they might get stabbed.
|
Kieron VonDeux
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:16:00 -
[183]
Edited by: Kieron VonDeux on 21/03/2011 23:17:49
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein a cloaky ship will usually only uncloak once it is within point range, which leaves you about 1.3s before it has you (Hulk) pointed...
You forgot sensor recalibration in that statement.
Edit: On most ships.
|
Umega
Solis Mensa
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:17:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Sentient Blade
Originally by: Umega A cloaky can't do this, a cloaky can't do that
No, it has to wait a whole half second after uncloaking to do them, by which point it's too late and you're screwed because the person uncloaking has already waited until they know they can win, and then done it.
I can grasp this fact quite easily having only been down in nullsec a few months. Which leads me to think you're deliberately ignoring the game balance problem because it works to your advantage.
Yes.. I forgot how cloaking wins wars and lone ratters/explorers/miners/haulers are so important to the fabric of nullsec. God forbid the loners are boned by a pilgrim 5km off the port side..
Now explain to everyone exactly how this is going to be countered by your specific scenario that has nothing to with the AFK cloaking topic. Are they going to spend time scanning down a cloaker to thwart such attempts? Really? Come on now. You'd be too busy doing something else, right?
I get it.. you would be busy doing something else with your ship designed to do such. God forbid there is a ship designed to hurt what it is your doing, losing your warped mental bubble of safety that you believe you are entitled cause you don't want to PvP at the particular moment. ---------------------------------------- Treat the EVE markets like you are its Pimp.. it is your 'willing' employee to fondle n use n abuse as you please. |
Kaedama Katar
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:17:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Kaedama Katar So let me get this straight...
You guys are complaining because people are, in a sense, nullifying your 100% free threat alert a.k.a. local chat by dedicating an entire account to having a cloak-skilled and covops-fitted character online in the system?
That is exactly what they're doing.
They're very very unhappy that their 100% accurate intel tool has a tiiiiiiiiny counter to it that brings the reliability of that intel down toà ohà 95% or so (just to throw a number out there), and they want a counter to that counter.
Oh wow... just... wow
Okay so now that I'm certain that this topic is absolutely and breathtakingly stupid I shall lean back, grab the popcorn and enjoy the show. Whiners... go ahead!
|
Sentient Blade
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:22:00 -
[186]
I'm just curious if you would still go to the bar if you knew there was someone there intending to stab you, and, whom could do so without significant consequence?
|
Cailais
Amarr Neo-Tech Solutions
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:33:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Sentient Blade I'm just curious if you would still go to the bar if you knew there was someone there intending to stab you, and, whom could do so without significant consequence?
No. But if I knew that information I'd bring some significant consequences with me.
The moral of this story is if you don't like getting stabbed, don't go to bars where the clientFle carry knives.
C.
the hydrostatic capsule blog
|
Diablo Ex
Caldari Reasonable People Sanctuary Pact
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:42:00 -
[188]
I just figured it out, the only true solution to the issue....
We need CCP to place all of k-space under CONCORD juristiction. There, problem solved. ---
|
randomname4me
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:46:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Sentient Blade
Originally by: Chesty McJubblies Jita would be down to about 200 inhabitants in about 30 minutes
Almost all of them being auto trade bots.
If that was true i would be an instant trillionaire since trade bots are very easy to manipulate into giving you all their profits.
Petition|Successful|Reimbursement|Lag Pick 3 |
Sentient Blade
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 00:28:00 -
[190]
Originally by: randomname4me If that was true i would be an instant trillionaire since trade bots are very easy to manipulate into giving you all their profits.
I'll concede that one - although considering the size of my block list from sitting in Jita I wouldn't be surprised if the chat didn't continue to scroll up pretty damn fast from the bots flooding local with trade scams etc.
|
|
Sixtina KL
The Shoop Group
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 02:29:00 -
[191]
Hi guys!
Don't mind me, I was just coming around to see if that place was anything different from a classic Democrats VS Republicans flamewar or a Christians VS Muslims smackdown, but since it's quite obviously a multiplicative product of the two and neither party has any damn clue what they're talking about, it would be terrific if somebody could EVEmail me once at least one person comes to his senses and finds a middle ground somewhere in all that gigantic long-lasting all-purpose extra-strength piece of **** that this discussion has been from day one.
Admit it, you're all just fighting a botters VS witch-hunters battle and nobody on here has the ovotestes to admit it. __________________________________
|
Chuck Sands
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 02:55:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Sixtina KL Admit it, you're all just fighting a botters VS witch-hunters battle and nobody on here has the ovotestes to admit it.
I totally admit it. This is an issue about locking down bots.
At least I hope all these people complaining about cloakers are concerned about their bots. Because otherwise they are just cowardly babies who want safety in their little 0.0 bear land.
|
Chesty McJubblies
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 03:13:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Akhmed TDT
Originally by: Flaser *snip* afk cloaking. *snip* There was a 2 week period in my 0.0 space where the same dude was "always" there, 24 hours day/7 days a week, get a life man!
Pure irony. "afk" people usually are doing something with their life. Noticing someone in system 24 hours a day, 7 days a week is not having a life.
heh, owned.
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 12:47:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Sixtina KL Hi guys!
Don't mind me, I was just coming around to see if that place was anything different from a classic Democrats VS Republicans flamewar or a Christians VS Muslims smackdown, but since it's quite obviously a multiplicative product of the two and neither party has any damn clue what they're talking about, it would be terrific if somebody could EVEmail me once at least one person comes to his senses and finds a middle ground somewhere in all that gigantic long-lasting all-purpose extra-strength piece of **** that this discussion has been from day one.
Admit it, you're all just fighting a botters VS witch-hunters battle and nobody on here has the ovotestes to admit it.
I already provided a middle ground solution. i think cloaks are fine as they are except in the case that someone cloaks up and goes to work for the next 10 hours. so the solution would be to provide some very slow and very inaccurate method of scanning cloaked ships down: 1. take 20 minutes to get a general location via scan 2. the "location" would be a sphere of 100km radius which the scanner would warp into random locations within. meaning they would still have to manage to decloak them.
this would give a real scout/online griefer the chance to either GTFO (warping a mere 150km away would buy another 30+minutes...) or drop the cyno they were setting the trap for - thus the method would ONLY find people who are excessively AFK. this would also mean that cloaked players could still AFK all day if in the space of a *real* pansy alliance that doesn't have the balls to attempt to defend themselves.
sidebar: its still irritating that so many people, who have likely never even been in a sov holding alliance, thinks only bots and pansy's dock up when nuets are in local. 1. they may just have a super-cap supported fleet on the other end a cyno waiting for a group of idiots who think they "aren't pansys" who will let one cloaked ship ruin their game play... 2. even if you have intel on what they have, if you amass a fleet that can defeat it then they simply wont decloak - and you can't find them (which IS the complaint here). I suppose you could rat/mine with large super-cap supported fleets, but that would be a fair bit ******ed. (would would kill rats faster than they respawn, and earn crap in the process) 3. those players who undock with cheap ships that they don;t care to lose are simply attracting more griefers thus ****ing off everyone else in the alliance.
given all of the above, the typical standings orders of every sov holding alliance i've known of has been to stay docked when reds or nuets are in system.
|
Ingvar Angst
Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 12:58:00 -
[195]
I wonder if the OP would support cloaked vessels disappearing from Local?
|
Chuck Sands
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 13:05:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Arnakoz
sidebar: its still irritating that so many people, who have likely never even been in a sov holding alliance, thinks only bots and pansy's dock up when nuets are in local. 1. they may just have a super-cap supported fleet on the other end a cyno waiting for a group of idiots who think they "aren't pansys" who will let one cloaked ship ruin their game play... 2. even if you have intel on what they have, if you amass a fleet that can defeat it then they simply wont decloak - and you can't find them (which IS the complaint here). I suppose you could rat/mine with large super-cap supported fleets, but that would be a fair bit ******ed. (would would kill rats faster than they respawn, and earn crap in the process) 3. those players who undock with cheap ships that they don;t care to lose are simply attracting more griefers thus ****ing off everyone else in the alliance.
given all of the above, the typical standings orders of every sov holding alliance i've known of has been to stay docked when reds or nuets are in system.
What do you think 0.0 is supposed to be? A cake walk?
Get over yourself. If you don't have the resources to protect your little kindercare of a system, then you shouldn't have it. If just the possibility of attack is enough to keep you docked up, then maybe staying in station spinning ships is more your type of game anyway.
|
bitters much
Nekkid Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 13:23:00 -
[197]
|
BIZZAROSTORMY
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 13:48:00 -
[198]
not that im in favour of it - but the obvious solution is something that counts cloak module activation cycles.
First cycle = normal cap use.
Second cycle = normal cap +1%
third = normal +2%
so that by 80-89 cloak module cycles its using too much cap and shuts down.
The non-afk cloaker simply warps about a bit to get cap back up and then recloaks.
Or just HTFU. I dont care really, Im riding a Vaga.
|
Ron Livingston
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 17:48:00 -
[199]
First I'll just say that I have no problems with cloaking, afk or otherwise.
but to all the people who do, how about this for a potential change, add an additional mod that makes ships unscanable, and change the current cloak to make ships invisible. Scanning a cloaked ship would warp you to within like 30K or something. So then if you scan you can see what they're flying , if they move when you fly there, you get a chance to uncloak them. and fitting both a cloak and a antiscanner would gimp most ships if they wanted to be AFK the way they are now.
|
Ingvar Angst
Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 17:53:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Ron Livingston First I'll just say that I have no problems with cloaking, afk or otherwise.
but to all the people who do, how about this for a potential change, add an additional mod that makes ships unscanable, and change the current cloak to make ships invisible. Scanning a cloaked ship would warp you to within like 30K or something. So then if you scan you can see what they're flying , if they move when you fly there, you get a chance to uncloak them. and fitting both a cloak and a antiscanner would gimp most ships if they wanted to be AFK the way they are now.
It's not really broken, therefore doesn't really need fixing. The real tears are flowing from people with bots that automatically warp to a station if someone shows up in local. No one cares about them.
|
|
Easton West
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 18:13:00 -
[201]
i support banning flaser
|
Ron Livingston
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 18:24:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Ron Livingston First I'll just say that I have no problems with cloaking, afk or otherwise.
but to all the people who do, how about this for a potential change, add an additional mod that makes ships unscanable, and change the current cloak to make ships invisible. Scanning a cloaked ship would warp you to within like 30K or something. So then if you scan you can see what they're flying , if they move when you fly there, you get a chance to uncloak them. and fitting both a cloak and a antiscanner would gimp most ships if they wanted to be AFK the way they are now.
It's not really broken, therefore doesn't really need fixing. The real tears are flowing from people with bots that automatically warp to a station if someone shows up in local. No one cares about them.
I didn't say fix, I said change.
The only reason I suggested it is I'm a little afraid that CCP may eventually cave in to these wieners.
|
Ingvar Angst
Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 18:51:00 -
[203]
Originally by: Ron Livingston
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Ron Livingston First I'll just say that I have no problems with cloaking, afk or otherwise.
but to all the people who do, how about this for a potential change, add an additional mod that makes ships unscanable, and change the current cloak to make ships invisible. Scanning a cloaked ship would warp you to within like 30K or something. So then if you scan you can see what they're flying , if they move when you fly there, you get a chance to uncloak them. and fitting both a cloak and a antiscanner would gimp most ships if they wanted to be AFK the way they are now.
It's not really broken, therefore doesn't really need fixing. The real tears are flowing from people with bots that automatically warp to a station if someone shows up in local. No one cares about them.
I didn't say fix, I said change.
The only reason I suggested it is I'm a little afraid that CCP may eventually cave in to these wieners.
Your "change" appears to allow any ship to become unscannable with the mod added and pretty well breaks cloaking. Both ideas are bad and contribute mainly to bots. You should pod yourself for suggesting them.
|
Kijo Rikki
Caldari Point of No Return Waterboard
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 18:54:00 -
[204]
You could always go kill the afk cloakers corpmates and alliance members indiscriminately.
|
Parleion
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 09:12:00 -
[205]
The general complaint seems to be that you have no idea if they have a massive hotdrop force on the other side. That's a stupid complaint. Let me tell you how to handle a 24hr afk cloaky:
1. Check out his corp. Hey look, it's right there in local where you've been staring at him. And it tells you exactly how many people are in it. Same with the alliance. You can then look them up on battleclinic and see if they have a history of hotdropping in nullsec. If they do, you can see if it's a bunch of blackops stuff, or if it's caps and super caps, or if it's a full on titan jump bridge hotdtrop. Free intel FTW.
Let's say you're too dumb to do that though, or you're worried there might be more in play, as if some group of completely random neutral people decided they had nothing better to do than wait to ruin your ratting experience with a massive supercap hotdrop.
2. Set a trap. Use cheap ships at first. If you get hotdropped and it's by more than you can handle, well ****. You lost some ships, but you gained intel. Now you know their tactics, and you can set up a better trap. Afraid they'll jump in more supercaps than you can handle? Well bummer. That's nullsec. If you can't defend the space, you shouldn't own it. If you set a trap and they don't bite, they might have not been at the computer at that point in time, or they might have known that they couldn't handle whatever you might be bringing, or they might just be revealed to be nothing but a scare tactic with no real power backing it up. Try the trap again later, and again, and again. Even if he doesn't bite, you're getting your ratting and plexing in, so woo hoo at that.
I've been the AFK cloaker, and I've been in the systems haunted by them. Trust me, when you fly in Mostly Harmless space, EVERYONE docks up and refuses to leave to AFK cloakers, and they're all just as idiotic as the people complaining on this thread. If you don't have the balls to fly in nullsec, don't fly in nullsec. Period.
|
Azhpol
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 10:34:00 -
[206]
Or, here is an idea... Do your ratting with a recon cloaked up on grid with you... 100km+ point/sensor damp range on my arazu, with dual points and 3 damps. Cloaker shows up and uncloaks, BLAM! Now hes locked down by your friendly cloaker. You see a cyno go up? Safe up/fleet up/man up. You see local spike for no reason? your being hotdropped by a blackops, and know what your up against(mainly bombers).
Still fearful of being hotdropped? Cynojammers are your friend, if you have sov you should have some of these.
Now, either learn to fly smart, or get the hell out of nullsec so those of us who can hack it can have your space without having to grief you out of eve as a whole to do it.
|
Chesty McJubblies
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 10:51:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki You could always go kill the afk cloakers corpmates and alliance members indiscriminately.
Which could have interesting results for those AFK Cloakers in NPC corps.
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 10:55:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Chuck Sands
If you don't have the resources to protect your little kindercare of a system, then you shouldn't have it.
you obviously didn't comprehend my post. resources [and balls] have nothing to do with it.
|
Azhpol
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 11:03:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Arnakoz
Originally by: Chuck Sands
If you don't have the resources to protect your little kindercare of a system, then you shouldn't have it.
you obviously didn't comprehend my post. resources [and balls] have nothing to do with it.
Its either a lack of balls or a lack of understanding how mechanics works.
Or you run a bot.
L2P or GB2WOW
|
Arnakoz
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 11:12:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Azhpol Or, here is an idea... Do your ratting with a recon cloaked up on grid with you... 100km+ point/sensor damp range on my arazu, with dual points and 3 damps. Cloaker shows up and uncloaks, BLAM! Now hes locked down by your friendly cloaker. You see a cyno go up? Safe up/fleet up/man up. You see local spike for no reason? your being hotdropped by a blackops, and know what your up against(mainly bombers).
Still fearful of being hotdropped? Cynojammers are your friend, if you have sov you should have some of these.
Now, either learn to fly smart, or get the hell out of nullsec so those of us who can hack it can have your space without having to grief you out of eve as a whole to do it.
cynojamming is good. but there should be some level of cat and mouse to be had with cloakers. and AFK cloaking while at work makes griefing way too easy IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |