Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:23:00 -
[481] - Quote
Adequately defend your space and a cloaked ship has plenty of risk. If you're so lazy you don't have gatecamps 23/7 into your ratting systems, why should the cloaker be penalized? |
The Apostle
The Black Priests
273
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:30:00 -
[482] - Quote
KrakizBad wrote:Adequately defend your space and a cloaked ship has plenty of risk. If you're so lazy you don't have gatecamps 23/7 into your ratting systems, why should the cloaker be penalized? Link the kills where you've managed to stop a recon getting into PXF and I'll believe everything you say henceforth.
AFK cloakies are there for area denial as much as you're here promoting reality denial. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|
baltec1
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:30:00 -
[483] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Yes that person easily becomes active after afk cloaking with obviously no warning. Because without local you cant tell if someone has logged off left or whatever.
So the idea is to not remove or delay local but to add risk to those who are walking away or otherwise not paying attention to the client.
In retrospect I think I ought to have made a pictorial post explaining my probe idea. If it was in images it might be easier to understand that I do not want to seriously impact active cloaking. I think I will have to log into Sisi and fire up the GIMP and do that.
The other week I spent 3 hours scouting a POS in my cov ops holding a position for a warp in. Your idea makes this impossible.
As for risk, how about the risk free ratting that the foolpoof intel tool that is local provides making it just about impossible to catch people unawares? |
The Apostle
The Black Priests
273
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:36:00 -
[484] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Yes that person easily becomes active after afk cloaking with obviously no warning. Because without local you cant tell if someone has logged off left or whatever.
So the idea is to not remove or delay local but to add risk to those who are walking away or otherwise not paying attention to the client.
In retrospect I think I ought to have made a pictorial post explaining my probe idea. If it was in images it might be easier to understand that I do not want to seriously impact active cloaking. I think I will have to log into Sisi and fire up the GIMP and do that. The other week I spent 3 hours scouting a POS in my cov ops holding a position for a warp in. Your idea makes this impossible. As for risk, how about the risk free ratting that the foolpoof intel tool that is local provides making it just about impossible to catch people unawares? baltec1 - you are repeatedly quoting what you ARE doing while cloaked. The idea being presented can ONLY affect those NOT at keyboard.
At the absolute most, the idea of probing you out while you're active would be the tiniest of inconveniences.
The AFK cloaky however will be in serious trouble if he's a asleep in bed. THAT's the proposal. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:44:00 -
[485] - Quote
I'm yet to see someone point out how he can be cloaked, sitted at his PC, and be completely gutted by a T2 probe (remember skill requirements) that can, at best, put someone 10km away from him.
Oh how can we think of something so godly unbalanced! Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
380
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:53:00 -
[486] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:I'm yet to see someone point out how he can be cloaked, sitted at his PC, and be completely gutted by a T2 probe (remember skill requirements) that can, at best, put someone 10km away from him.
Oh how can we think of something so godly unbalanced!
You mean have 10 ships warp in, dump 40 drones to uncloak and have him locked down in 10 seconds. I can see where that might be a little unnerving.
Mr Epeen
If you can read this, you haven't blocked me yet. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:56:00 -
[487] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:I'm yet to see someone point out how he can be cloaked, sitted at his PC, and be completely gutted by a T2 probe (remember skill requirements) that can, at best, put someone 10km away from him.
Oh how can we think of something so godly unbalanced! You mean have 10 ships warp in, dump 40 drones to uncloak and have him locked down in 10 seconds. I can see where that might be a little unnerving. Mr Epeen
So move the second you see people warping in. Its meant to be troublesome for the hunter so if 10km is too low, make it 15 or 20. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:56:00 -
[488] - Quote
damned ccp being ganked all the time. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Rhinanna
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 00:17:00 -
[489] - Quote
Quote:They cant do anything or hurt anyone while cloaked.
You can't hurt anything while docked either, but are you going to sit 50km off a station you know has a red arty fleet ready to undock inside?
Deny them the ability to uncloak on demand then its a different story.
On this basis, you would be fine with me having a module, that allowed me, from any point in the universe to teleport to 2km behind your ship? After all I can't do anything while teleporting just as you can't do anything while cloaking....... Oh and to see what is around you as well before jumping... No you wouldn't, its not what cloaking does that matters, its what cloaking ALLOWS you to do.
I don't want to see cloaking removed, I just don't want it to be the perfect, inpenetrable defence it is now because its bad for the game and bad for pvp. Lets add the hide and seek element! It should be damm hard/near impossible to find anyone cloaked, but it should be (feasibly) possible. Nothing should be perfect and without a counter like cloaking is.
Quote:Well hey, at least now I know who you are!
You should have left this part out, because what Nmeh did only works against bots.
If you can read, you know who I am. This is my main. I don't need to hide behind a alt thanks. Oh and nMeh never got me while ratting as far as I remember, I just ignored him as his vaga couldn't do **** to my Mael and I knew he didn't fit cynos from intel and the fact we did know you didn't have a cap fleet in jump range at that point ;) Not sure if he got my vaga when I tried to chase him down once, I can't remember to be honest.
Also how does not appearing in local only work on ratters? He didn't appear on local for players either till a long while after he entered system.
Remember PL posted a video showing it been done and working on players, I think he only caught a few of our miners that way however... damm miners ;) I kept telling them to fit warp stabs, but do they, noo......
Quote:The life of a ratting bot is the true 100% safe trade closely followed by a none bot ratter who is safe so long as they are paying attention to local.
So basically you are saying never rat in a system with a red in local and to ignore reds cloakies in local because you can't prove they aren't AFK. Contradiction much?
And I'll tell you what cloakers can do, its called 'de-cloaking' and allow you to do whatever you normally do.... You may not be able to do anything WHILE cloaked, but been cloaked allows you to get into the right place to do very very nasty things....
Its kinda the point that ISK making, specifically low value (60mil/hour) ISK making has to be fairly safe. If its not, why do it. Remeber not all alliances have that many systems they CAN rat in, so a few cloakies can stop a large chunk of their member's income with no real defence. This is a real screw over for the minor alliances that are trying to establish themselves in 0.0 and I was under the impression CCP are trying to encourage more people to move out to 0.0
Not having a reasonable income source is really not going to help this!!!! |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
380
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 00:20:00 -
[490] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:I'm yet to see someone point out how he can be cloaked, sitted at his PC, and be completely gutted by a T2 probe (remember skill requirements) that can, at best, put someone 10km away from him.
Oh how can we think of something so godly unbalanced! You mean have 10 ships warp in, dump 40 drones to uncloak and have him locked down in 10 seconds. I can see where that might be a little unnerving. Mr Epeen So move the second you see people warping in. Its meant to be troublesome for the hunter so if 10km is too low, make it 15 or 20.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea.
I was just giving an example of how it would be used for real as opposed to a forum mind puzzle. These things need to be looked at from all sides to achieve the right balance.
I actually sympathize with CCP in this respect. There are a lot of variables that don't get thought about until it's too late and then there is a whole new set of problems.
So probe at a distance to make Mr AFK sit up and take notice but also make it hard for him to be uncloaked might be the way to go. Then again I imagine it's possible to write up a script to auto warp if something shows up on grid.
Or not. I don't really have a clue. I only write scripts for mods in Bethesda games and have never tried any for EVE so I could be completely wrong :P
Mr Epeen
If you can read this, you haven't blocked me yet. |
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 00:24:00 -
[491] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:I'm yet to see someone point out how he can be cloaked, sitted at his PC, and be completely gutted by a T2 probe (remember skill requirements) that can, at best, put someone 10km away from him.
Oh how can we think of something so godly unbalanced! You mean have 10 ships warp in, dump 40 drones to uncloak and have him locked down in 10 seconds. I can see where that might be a little unnerving. Mr Epeen So move the second you see people warping in. Its meant to be troublesome for the hunter so if 10km is too low, make it 15 or 20. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I was just giving an example of how it would be used for real as opposed to a forum mind puzzle. These things need to be looked at from all sides to achieve the right balance. I actually sympathize with CCP in this respect. There are a lot of variables that don't get thought about until it's too late and then there is a whole new set of problems. So probe at a distance to make Mr AFK sit up and take notice but also make it hard for him to be uncloaked might be the way to go. Then again I imagine it's possible to write up a script to auto warp if something shows up on grid. Or not. I don't really have a clue. I only write scripts for mods in Bethesda games and have never tried any for EVE so I could be completely wrong :P Mr Epeen
Its possible.. Ah.. but now he would be breaching the EULA =) Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Rhinanna
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 00:29:00 -
[492] - Quote
At the same time, you could argue that if the cloaker isn't watching D-scan then he kinda deserves to die. The probe would be fairly blatant. It would basically be a sign post that "Hi, I trying to hunt you"
Only thing I don't like about it is the fact it gives away far too much of the cloakie's location. I think I'd prefer something that uncloaked them for a limited period, on a random timer till activation to stop it been used against gate runners, then if you try to probe them down he has a chance to warp away before you see where he was at all with the probes.
I liked my 'bomb the sun, create a solar flare' idea ;) Random, costs per decloak and takes a lot of the firepower of a BS/BC to use, but gives you a small window to hunter the cloaky down in. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:03:00 -
[493] - Quote
I just really worry about these ideas of either random decloak or direct placement or other things that don't give almost insane free warning to the active cloaker.
I was thinking about the direct placement probes but here is the issue. If you make it too close all you have to do is warp a drake and lob a bomb at it and that's that for the cloaker active or not. Too far and you have to completely spam the area to decloak him which encourages more can abuse.
I REALLY need to just make this pictorial post because once you see my idea I think you can understand how it is only of tiny tiny tiny inconvenience for the active cloaker and risky for the inactive cloaker without things that give a free kill for the defenders. Only the ones who are not active in the client should be in any serious risk.
And when I mean free warning I mean so blatant only and AFK person would ignore it. Such as the black window saying "WARNING: Cloak has been compromised Cloak will fail in 30 seconds!" And with my idea it goes even further warning the active cloaker someone is probing the random point "Warning! Cloak is being compromised change position" Meaning warp away and back to reset the random point. Only the AFK part needs to be targeted. |
The Apostle
The Black Priests
273
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:19:00 -
[494] - Quote
Morganta wrote:the argument that nobody should be 100% safe is complete crap
Can you please repeat that?
I'd like it preseved for posterity when I discuss that we need x, y and z and it's blown to hell and back.....
because NO-ONE in Eve should be 100% safe.... Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:21:00 -
[495] - Quote
Actually game mechanics get changed all the time. Its called balance. And I don't advocate an AFK timer I want a set of long skill and long scan time probes that can decloak someone who remains on the same grid for a long period of time (Half an hour hour or so) Using a random point so the location of the cloaker is not revealed and he has plenty of time to warp off grid to reset the point. Only the ones who go inactive on their client will be put in serious risk.
Damn I just need to make that pictorial post already. |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:23:00 -
[496] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Morganta wrote:the argument that nobody should be 100% safe is complete crap
Can you please repeat that? I'd like it preseved for posterity when I discuss that we need x, y and z and it's blown to hell and back..... because NO-ONE in Eve should be 100% safe....
I'll rephrase
the idea that cloaks should be nerfed because they make only cloakers 100% safe is complete crap
my bad for not being more specific
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:36:00 -
[497] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:KrakizBad wrote:Adequately defend your space and a cloaked ship has plenty of risk. If you're so lazy you don't have gatecamps 23/7 into your ratting systems, why should the cloaker be penalized? Link the kills where you've managed to stop a recon getting into PXF and I'll believe everything you say henceforth. AFK cloakies are there for area denial as much as you're here promoting reality denial.
http://www.fatal-ascension.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=48204
What's that? A carebear ship defending itself? Gee thought that wasn't possible. Now kindly explain why AFK cloakies are a problem again? Seems to me your argument (as usual) boils down to "AFK cloakies are a problem for me" |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:40:00 -
[498] - Quote
Rhinanna wrote: Remember PL posted a video showing it been done and working on players, I think he only caught a few of our miners that way however... damm miners ;) I kept telling them to fit warp stabs, but do they, noo......
You can thank Hubris for that, hes our video editor.
Sorry but there never was a no local exploit, we have a LOT of programer nerds in PL who have taken apart bot programs, the 'no local' exploit only ever caught botters, because it exploited a hole in the bot programing, not the EVE client.
It was funny to watch people like you sperge out over something you actually never saw happen yourself, and the ones who claimed him not to be in local are on a list of known botters that we have filed (you can check the forum dump from us about 9 months ago if you don't believe me, its all in print).
Basically at this point you sound like an angry bot farmer that knows if you whitelist the AFK guy in your system your screwed, and you don't want to do that, but you also really REALLY want your bot to run.
Easy on posting facts like that, it makes the weak and cowardly agitated. |
Jee'ta
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:40:00 -
[499] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Actually game mechanics get changed all the time. Its called balance. And I don't advocate an AFK timer I want a set of long skill and long scan time probes that can decloak someone who remains on the same grid for a long period of time (Half an hour hour or so) Using a random point so the location of the cloaker is not revealed and he has plenty of time to warp off grid to reset the point. Only the ones who go inactive on their client will be put in serious risk.
Damn I just need to make that pictorial post already.
People understand it. But CCP thinks ganks = goodfights and lots of people enjoy being able to *** up a system with near zero risk, so they choose not to understand it. The "he's cloaked so he can't hurt you" being perhaps the stupidest counter (you have to assume a cloaker is active) though removing local is thankfully dumb enough it's not going to happen.
Easier to adapt. Either try and bait it (only works if they're bad), do some PvP or take it as a hint to go play something else (my steam backlog is massive). That way you can have a system with AFK ships and logged out players seeing who gets bored first.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:43:00 -
[500] - Quote
Jee'ta wrote: That way you can have a system with AFK ships and logged out players seeing who gets bored first.
Actually for me, when the prey logs or docks up I run their sanctums for them. |
|
The Apostle
The Black Priests
273
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:46:00 -
[501] - Quote
KrakizBad wrote:The Apostle wrote:KrakizBad wrote:Adequately defend your space and a cloaked ship has plenty of risk. If you're so lazy you don't have gatecamps 23/7 into your ratting systems, why should the cloaker be penalized? Link the kills where you've managed to stop a recon getting into PXF and I'll believe everything you say henceforth. AFK cloakies are there for area denial as much as you're here promoting reality denial. http://www.fatal-ascension.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=48204What's that? A carebear ship defending itself? Gee thought that wasn't possible. Now kindly explain why AFK cloakies are a problem again? Seems to me your argument (as usual) boils down to "AFK cloakies are a problem for me" You're the second person to try linking a non-HD SB kill on a bait.
It's not even the topic. We're talking about the guys who are non-active, not noobs that baitfail.
Albeit I did ask for a recon kill at a gatecamp as you were proposing everybody can do unless they're "lazy".
(I can gladly say I have a Rapier kill on a set bait but it's STILL not the issue at hand.)
Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 01:49:00 -
[502] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:/snip whine
I'm still waiting for the killmail from someone who is AFK. You show me yours and I'll show you mine. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 02:31:00 -
[503] - Quote
The Apostle wrote: It's not even the topic. We're talking about the guys who are non-active, not noobs that baitfail.
Albeit I did ask for a recon kill at a gatecamp as you were proposing everybody can do unless they're "lazy".
Unless people started gate camping with hulks I think you've made a mistake.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 02:59:00 -
[504] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:KrakizBad wrote:The Apostle wrote:KrakizBad wrote:Adequately defend your space and a cloaked ship has plenty of risk. If you're so lazy you don't have gatecamps 23/7 into your ratting systems, why should the cloaker be penalized? Link the kills where you've managed to stop a recon getting into PXF and I'll believe everything you say henceforth. AFK cloakies are there for area denial as much as you're here promoting reality denial. http://www.fatal-ascension.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=48204What's that? A carebear ship defending itself? Gee thought that wasn't possible. Now kindly explain why AFK cloakies are a problem again? Seems to me your argument (as usual) boils down to "AFK cloakies are a problem for me" You're the second person to try linking a non-HD SB kill on a bait. It's not even the topic. We're talking about the guys who are non-active, not noobs that baitfail. Albeit I did ask for a recon kill at a gatecamp as you were proposing everybody can do unless they're "lazy". (I can gladly say I have a Rapier kill on a set bait but it's STILL not the issue at hand.)
I thought that by now you'd have learned that its counter-productive to ask for a "fix" for "AFK Cloakers". Its a battle that is not worth waging because you cannot win it. AFK people are not a problem, because they are AFK. =)
If you wanna talk, talk cloaks in general. So far i'm yet to find someone that will convince me that cloaked ships should remain completely uncounterable. You wanna roll in EVE's space, you accept that there should be no completely safe place to hide other than stations. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
KaarBaak
84
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:11:00 -
[505] - Quote
Anyone afraid of cloaked afk non-blues must be running a bot. It's the only answer that makes sense when reading the posts from people demanding a change to cloaking mechanics.
Hopefully CCP is monitoring this thread and noting which accounts are pushing for this change.
|
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:12:00 -
[506] - Quote
KaarBaak wrote: Anyone afraid of cloaked afk non-blues must be running a bot.
Good point. Anyone willing to cry about it for 25 pages sounds like somebody running a whole fleet of bots.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
155
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:14:00 -
[507] - Quote
AFK cloaking is a legitimate income denial tactic. Get lost. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
149
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:26:00 -
[508] - Quote
Andski wrote:AFK cloaking is a legitimate income denial tactic. Get lost.
How so?
Hes AFK ffs. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Rhes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:34:00 -
[509] - Quote
If afk cloaking keeps The Apostle out of nullsec it should be buffed. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
149
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 03:40:00 -
[510] - Quote
Rhes wrote:If afk cloaking keeps The Apostle out of nullsec it should be buffed.
You know that doing that will keep him in here, right? Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |