Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
640
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:42:00 -
[121] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote: I came to this forum to discuss a feature that I think would be helpful to the game and I will continue to do so.
your idea is sh*t and all you want is safety not more pvp. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:43:00 -
[122] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Behr Oroo wrote:That's your opinion. I disagree with you. You may call me what you want. I dont take forums personally. I came to this forum to discuss a feature that I think would be helpful to the game and I will continue to do so. Your own responses make you less and less credible in the discussion at hand. To be fair you did post an idea that is designed to work exclusively on people who are AFK (and therefore cannot fight back) Not that I mean to imply that both parties need to be able to fight back for PVP to occur, it's just that it's somewhat obvious that you are not looking for fights. You just want the other guy to go away.
You are absolutely correct. I did suggest that but it wasn't under the idea of some passive nerf to cloak or something that like. I suggested an ACTIVE hunting of cloaked ships, one that requires that the pilot is prepared for PVP. I dont want to run the cloaker off. I want to kill him and send him home. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:44:00 -
[123] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Behr Oroo wrote: I came to this forum to discuss a feature that I think would be helpful to the game and I will continue to do so.
your idea is sh*t and all you want is safety not more pvp.
Sorry you feel that way Robert. I disagree with your stand that "everything is fine". You are more than welcome to disagree with my stance as well. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
640
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:47:00 -
[124] - Quote
we all should stop bumping this terrible thread. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:48:00 -
[125] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:we all should stop bumping this terrible thread.
I believe you are the only one getting worked up over it. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
509
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:21:00 -
[126] - Quote
For once, I agree with Robert. OP is several AU away from his rocker and has consumed enough of his own snake oil that he honestly believes his own claims. No further progress can be made to educate the OP about the error of his ways. I do, however, strongly recommend putting cloaked alts in all of his corp and alliance's systems. I would also suggest wardeccing his corp/alliance's highsec logistics wing. After all, OP does want more PvP in EVE. Furthermore...
We should all stop bumping this terrible thread. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:29:00 -
[127] - Quote
I guess I shouldn't be shocked that all in all the thread boiled down to name calling and threats.
Oh well. |
Friggz
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
155
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:54:00 -
[128] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote:[
I havent lied about anything. My intentions are truly to create more PVP. You are the one making assumptions about my intentions based on your own bias against industrial toons.
You have suggested a counter to only afk cloaky ships. A tactic that is useful in exactly one situation: Countering the intel tool that is local in a ratting system. That is all afk cloakys are useful for. That is the only reason anyone would ever do it.
Then you tell me it's about pvp. As stated, I am not an idiot and neither are you. We both know what this is about. You claiming this isn't about pvp is like proposing changes to strip miners and then saying it's not about mining. It's a change to counter a tool designed to do one thing, it's about that one thing, and that one thing is pve.
Look, I get it. Afk cloaking is lame. It is. No one likes tying up an account and keeping their computer on 24/7. The problem is right now it is a necessary evil. There needs to be some method of creating risk in 0.0 There has to be a way to disrupt the ratters in a war. 0.0 cannot be made 100% safe. Until an alternative to local is released, we need afk cloaking.
The Evolution of the Stealth Bomber, and the story of the first Black Ops Capital Kill in EvE.
https://truestories.eveonline.com/ideas/969 |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 00:03:00 -
[129] - Quote
Friggz wrote:Behr Oroo wrote:[
I havent lied about anything. My intentions are truly to create more PVP. You are the one making assumptions about my intentions based on your own bias against industrial toons.
You have suggested a counter to only afk cloaky ships. A tactic that is useful in exactly one situation: Countering the intel tool that is local in a ratting system. That is all afk cloakys are useful for. That is the only reason anyone would ever do it. Then you tell me it's about pvp. As stated, I am not an idiot and neither are you. We both know what this is about. You claiming this isn't about pvp is like proposing changes to strip miners and then saying it's not about mining. It's a change to counter a tool designed to do one thing, it's about that one thing, and that one thing is pve. Look, I get it. Afk cloaking is lame. It is. No one likes tying up an account and keeping their computer on 24/7. The problem is right now it is a necessary evil. There needs to be some method of creating risk in 0.0 There has to be a way to disrupt the ratters in a war. 0.0 cannot be made 100% safe. Until an alternative to local is released, we need afk cloaking.
Believe it or not, I am actually trying to offer a solution that would increase PVP and I do mean that. I can rat or mine anywhere I would like. If you would like to tie up a dozen accounts camping each system that I could possible do these things in, please feel free.
You say local is overpowered. Ok. You agree cloaky camping is lame but necessary. Then you immediately validate my point in that something needs to change. A flat change to local wouldn't solve the issue without a proper counter balance and we all know that.
I am actually trying to have a discussion here with PVPers and PVEers on a proper solution that even you agree could use some altering. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15007
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 00:16:00 -
[130] - Quote
Why is it you suggest nerfing cloaks and not the mechanic that they are attempting to use to cause you issues?
Why should you gain even more intel, on top of the already powerful local intel channel?
How is this in anyway balanced?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
|
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 00:29:00 -
[131] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Why is it you suggest nerfing cloaks and not the mechanic that they are attempting to use to cause you issues?
Why should you gain even more intel, on top of the already powerful local intel channel?
How is this in anyway balanced?
To be honest my idea was based on a concept that was from another game. I have seen it work and I played that game for a long time, so I know it worked. Very few people complained about the power of stealth cause it was properly balance.
Now in shadowbane there was a global channel but no local, but there were several skills and nearly all classes could use a form of tracking that would tell them who is around at any given time, so it functioned very similar to local but without the chat feature.
I have offered the idea of making BlackOps ships not show up on local. I thought this was a fair compromise, yet no one seemed to even really comment on it. Would this not offer the same thing that you are looking for? IF no black ops ships ever showed up on local, then they could easily move thru systems. Much like in shadowbane, it is unlikely someone is going to sit in a scout ship all the time, just to watch for ships.
No, the most likely scenario is the black ops fleet will actually find its target and actually get to destroy their target. The side effect of his being that it would give away their position and thus intel would be flooded with info on them. Yet they could go back to hunting, but now there is a good chance scouts will be out there.
This sounds like a decent attempt at offering balance. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15007
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 00:42:00 -
[132] - Quote
Balanced for you and making null PvE safer maybe, but not a balanced approach.
This isn't a chicken and egg sitution. We know what came first and why people AFK to try and subvert it's power. You cannot look at this game and the mechanics used and compare it to another for that fact.
Null is already safer than high sec, due to how well local gives it's intel. Intel that's also had a boost of late. For you to ask for yet more intel, ontop of what is quite frankly intel on a plate easy mode, is ridiculous.
I've seen the argument used that they are completely safe whilst cloaked. But for that argument to hold water, then it must apply both ways.
Also if you have issues with cynos, then make a thread about it. It's a seperate active mechanic and doesn't require a cloak to work.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 01:03:00 -
[133] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Balanced for you and making null PvE safer maybe, but not a balanced approach.
This isn't a chicken and egg sitution. We know what came first and why people AFK to try and subvert it's power. You cannot look at this game and the mechanics used and compare it to another for that fact.
Null is already safer than high sec, due to how well local gives it's intel. Intel that's also had a boost of late. For you to ask for yet more intel, ontop of what is quite frankly intel on a plate easy mode, is ridiculous.
I've seen the argument used that they are completely safe whilst cloaked. But for that argument to hold water, then it must apply both ways.
Also if you have issues with cynos, then make a thread about it. It's a seperate active mechanic and doesn't require a cloak to work.
I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
As for comparing this game to another. Shadowbane is a very fair comparison. It was a PVP based game with player owned assets, guilds, resource harvesting, crafting and about everything else that EVE does, it was just placed in a different setting.
Again I ask. What would you suggest is a fix for the issue? Several in this thread have admitted that there are issues that need to be considered. What would you consider a fair and balanced solution? |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
509
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 01:40:00 -
[134] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote: I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
Funny enough, black ops are the least suited to being used in the way you appear to be envisioning them. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 01:45:00 -
[135] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Behr Oroo wrote: I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
Funny enough, black ops are the least suited to being used in the way you appear to be envisioning them.
OK increase it to any ship that is able to equip the tech 2 cloak. Take all of them from local. Tengu, loki, bombers, all of it. Only thing that would show up in local are ships that are using tech 1 cloak. Why? It's a tech 1. It's not as refined as the tech 2.
|
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
509
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 02:58:00 -
[136] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote:Astroniomix wrote:Behr Oroo wrote: I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
Funny enough, black ops are the least suited to being used in the way you appear to be envisioning them. OK increase it to any ship that is able to equip the tech 2 cloak. Take all of them from local. Tengu, loki, bombers, all of it. Only thing that would show up in local are ships that are using tech 1 cloak. Why? It's a tech 1. It's not as refined as the tech 2. This is slightly better. Though the cloaked ship should also not be able to view local while cloaked. (on a slightly unrelated note, black ops cannot use covert ops cloaks)
Also I'm assuming you meant "covert ops cloaks" when you said "t2 cloaks". |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 03:31:00 -
[137] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Behr Oroo wrote:Astroniomix wrote:Behr Oroo wrote: I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
Funny enough, black ops are the least suited to being used in the way you appear to be envisioning them. OK increase it to any ship that is able to equip the tech 2 cloak. Take all of them from local. Tengu, loki, bombers, all of it. Only thing that would show up in local are ships that are using tech 1 cloak. Why? It's a tech 1. It's not as refined as the tech 2. This is slightly better. Though the cloaked ship should also not be able to view local while cloaked. (on a slightly unrelated note, black ops cannot use covert ops cloaks) Also I'm assuming you meant "covert ops cloaks" when you said "t2 cloaks".
Yes yes. Covert Ops. Sorry. So it would need to include anything under the Black Ops category and any ship that can use the covert ops cloak. So a fairly wide band of ships.
Now why cant the cloaks see local? Just asking from a balance point of view. How would this effect them cause I dont think them being able to see local would be bad or good but I am asking cause I am unsure if that really is the case.
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
513
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 04:06:00 -
[138] - Quote
From a balance point of view, if you're not appearing in Local you shouldn't also have the benefit of seeing the people who are appearing in it. That's why cloaked ships can't see local when their cloaks are engaged and they don't appear in the channel list. |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 05:03:00 -
[139] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:From a balance point of view, if you're not appearing in Local you shouldn't also have the benefit of seeing the people who are appearing in it. That's why cloaked ships can't see local when their cloaks are engaged and they don't appear in the channel list.
Makes sense. Though I wouldn't be against the idea of letting them have local either.
So we remove a group of ships from local. Not bad. I like that idea and actually I think it would encourage me to PVP more often as well, since I tend to enjoy frigate and stealth gangs.
Now to balance this upgrade, the scout ship would need to come into existence. Of course it would need to be balanced. With Eve, all I can think of are a form of scan probes that would really work. Oh hmm or what about this.
We currently have the scanner for anoms and rat sites and stuff. What if the scout ship AND the cloak ships get something similar but all it does is provide a list of ships in space. If they are uncloaked ships it would give a class of ship, like industrial, mining barge, battleship, etc etc. If its a cloaky, it would just say unknown. It would not provide intel for people in station. Now this scan could be left running, just like the anom scan can be, but would need a pretty long rescan. Maybe 2 or 3 minutes. That leaves a lot of time for things to change in a system. You would need to use probes to finish the job and locate your target. Then it would fall back on the mechanics what I originally posted.
I dont know. I will have to think about the ship part more. It's late and I am tired.
Though great talks. Though with all this I doubt anything will chance but if CCP does see this, it would seem some fair ideas are being put together.
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15013
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 09:45:00 -
[140] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote:
I am a little lost on how giving you what you are asking for is not a balanced approach. By removing Black Ops ships from local, you are giving that class of ship a HUGE bonus and making them far more deadly.
As for comparing this game to another. Shadowbane is a very fair comparison. It was a PVP based game with player owned assets, guilds, resource harvesting, crafting and about everything else that EVE does, it was just placed in a different setting.
Again I ask. What would you suggest is a fix for the issue? Several in this thread have admitted that there are issues that need to be considered. What would you consider a fair and balanced solution?
The point about black ops has already been raised by Astroniomix, so I'll leave that.
As far as Shadowbane is concerned, I'm simply not interested. It's like comparing chalk and cheese and doomed to fail. If you like it so much, then go and play that instead to be quite frank.
Those of us that have responded to 'I can't use the current mechanics, to stop people playing war games in my head' threads over the past years, know the mechanics involved in this. We know which mechanics are being used for and then used against players. You're just yet another player in a long line, who believes they have a new look on this and makes a thread about it. Yet fails to include the actual mechanic being used for the point of AFKing.
I do question if your idea even would target those AFK? What's to stop them simply pointing out to space and moving constantly whilst cloaked? Then what about those scouting or gaining intel? You're basically saying they should move often, because your use of local is being compromised. This idea is a direct nerf to active cloaking, not including the latest moving of goal posts.
You talk of increasing PvP. Yet as far as I'm aware, no one every took place in combat PvP whilst AFK and cloaked. Do you know you can AFK without a cloak and gain the same psychological effects? Shouldn't that alone be enough for you to understand the mechanics at play here?
Now we've reached a point where you're so focused on nerfing cloaks, you ended up buffing them instead. Yet the mechanic being used for AFKing, is still there.
So back to basics here.
Exactly what problem are you trying to solve? Let's get right to the core of what you wish to remove. Let's keep it simple, as this horse has a bad smell about it.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
|
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1426
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 10:25:00 -
[141] - Quote
Mag's wrote:I do question if your idea even would target those AFK? What's to stop them simply pointing out to space and moving constantly whilst cloaked? Then what about those scouting or gaining intel? You're basically saying they should move often, because your use of local is being compromised. This idea is a direct nerf to active cloaking, not including the latest moving of goal posts.
Exactly. It's been brought up numerous times in this thread how his ideas are direct nerfs to a number of activities that players, who are very much at the keyboard and active, partake in on a regular basis.
That's why I simply refuse to believe this thread is about "AFK" players, or about "increasing pvp" - because the nature of the ideas, which he keeps insisting on, are simply - unarguably - nerfs to active, pvp-oriented tasks.
This isn't about increasing PVP, or AFK players, or anything else. It's about removing uncertainty for carebear PVErs. They don't know what a cloaked player is up to, if he's there at all, and how much of a threat he is. So they come up with these convoluted, dishonest threads but when you get right down to it, when you ask the right questions, it all falls apart.
Thats why everyone is so sick of these threads.
I'd rather they were just honest, and said they wanted free, perfect, absolute intel and complete certainty while in nullsec.
It goes against core concepts of not just nullsec but all of EVE, but hey, at least they'd be telling the truth and not confusing the matter with threads like these.
|
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
633
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 11:48:00 -
[142] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
This isn't about increasing PVP, or AFK players, or anything else. It's about removing uncertainty for carebear PVErs. They don't know what a cloaked player is up to, if he's there at all, and how much of a threat he is. So they come up with these convoluted, dishonest threads but when you get right down to it, when you ask the right questions, it all falls apart.
Thats why everyone is so sick of these threads.
I couldn't agree more Gunslinger.
Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. |
Shiho Weitong
Koa Mai Hoku Nulli Legio
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 11:57:00 -
[143] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote:I know this has been posted on before but I am tossing an idea out there to be considered.
Several years ago a game was created by Wolfpack studios called Shadowbane. In that game there were stealth classes of character; thief, assassin, scout, etc etc. Now Wolfpack determined that stealth was a very powerful thing and limited in certain ways. I am suggesting an idea here that is similar to theirs.
Scout class ship:
In shadowbane the scout was the ONLY class that could see hidden characters. This wasn't a passive skill but one that required that the scout track down and get close enough to its target before he could see them. This idea could easily be implemented into a ship design. The scout was no more or less powerful than the average stealth character, and thus this new scout class ship would be a frigate in design, with roughly the same power as a single bomber.
How it would work:
The idea would be simple. This ship would be able to scan systems with probes, like combat probes but would be able to find a general location of a cloaked ship, say a 25KM radius around the ship, and decreasing to 5KM as you train skills. Now once the scout class ship has located the general area the cloaked ship might be, he can warp to that area but then he would have to manually fly around to locate the cloaked ship. Once the scout is within 5k of the cloaked ship, the player AND ONLY THAT PLAYER, would be able to see the cloaked ship. He would not be able to bookmark the ship or someone broadcast the location to his fleet while the cloaked ship is still cloaked. He would have to get within the standard 2.5k to decloak the ship. Once the cloak is dropped, BOTH ships are decloaked, and then normal combat can begin. NOW the scout ship would have one major advantage. A targeted cyno jammer. It only works on a single ship, only has a range of 5k and would be fueled by something like heavy water or something of that nature. Quick cycle time and fairly high use of materials to power it, so that its not used as a crutch to stop all cyno fields. The idea is a skilled player has to work to lock down a cloaked ship AND if they succeed, they need to have an advantage. The jammer is that advantage.
What this ship would do:
This would allow for PVP which is what CCP wants. It would combat AFK cloaked camping of a system. Anyone that is AFK is at risk of losing their ship. I feel that a cloak shouldn't be a safe guard. Be active or don't play. AFK cloak camping of a system is cheap tactic and requires 0 skill level to accomplish. I am purposing to add some skill back into an already skill dependent game. Most cloak campers are in ships that are worthless and they are preying on expensive ships that people have invested large amounts of time and effort into. I personally feel that if I am going to be at risk of attack, I want it to be on a level playing field.
I realize that PVPers hate care bears and CCP wants to increase the amount of PVP in the game. Well if they want that then they need to level the playing field. This ship design does that, especially with a cyno jammer.
Like I said. This is an idea. It can be and will be refined, BUT I think its a easily implemented solution that every side could agree is fair.
So you're saying that when I'm laying low on grid, watching your stations and gathering intel for my guys, I should be able to be found because I might be afk?
Ok then. In the same line of fairness, all mining lasers activated should pop up regionwide like an incursion, as the miners might be botters.
I have a real hard time seeing how local isn't the real culprit here. The ONLY reason AFK cloakers even matter is due to that fact that people DO NOT want pvp. And we're not talking about the cloakers here. I'm talking about the people who instantly dock or go possing when local spikes +1. How are we going to "Increase PVP" participation of these people? If you say we don't have to, you're simply a hypocrite banging on your own drums.
Local should be removed from anything that is not highsec. That would be "fair"
EDIT: I bolded a part for you. Explain how a hulk AFK within a POS-shield is at risk please? |
Behr Oroo
The Circus Corp Nulli Tertius
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 22:36:00 -
[144] - Quote
I have been at work, so let me take a moment to respond to a few comments.
Mag's
If you're going to ignore my comparision to shadowbane, then you are ignoring a key part of my idea. It is clear you don't know much about this game, as you have suggested that I go play it. Well that isn't possible, as Ubisoft closed the game after they absorbed Wolfpack studios, several years ago.
There is nothing wrong with using an idea from somewhere else and molding it to fit the situation. Eve and Shadowbane are very simular, as they are both sandbox games, with heavy PVP and PVE content.
I am not ignorant to the fact that people have made suggestions about this in the past. I know this issue has been talked about. If you aren't interested in trying to help offer a solution, then you are more than welcome to not respond.
As for the cloaky floating off in one direction in a system. Yes, they could do that. It would make tracking them that much harder, but not impossible.
So with your final question. What do I really want? What I want is a way to fight back. What happens when a fleet of battleships comes into your system? Usually a CTA is called and there is an attempt to remove them. So, same thing here. If a group of hostiles comes into my home, I am asking for the ablitly to be able to fight back. Is there anything wrong with that? Why should I allow you to sit in my home system and just gather intel or threaten my opertations and no be able to do something about it? Industrial corps have invested heavily in their home systems with stations, POSs and other items. These items should give them a home field advantage. If a Hulk is parked in a POS, he is paying for his protection by fueling the POS or even being the one that built it. All these defensive structures take time and should provide the protection that they currently do.
With that said, it would seem that you dislike this idea. People have suggested that people cant hide in stations, or in POSs. What sense does this make? Honestly. They built or bought their home. Why should they not use it for what it is meant for. In turn with that said, PVPers risk very little by invading other systems. The worst is their ship, possibly their pod and more than likely no implants if its a suicide run. So if I understand right, you want me to be vulnerable to your attack, while I am mining or ratting, and be perfectly ok with the idea that I am in a ship that is no where near equiped to fight a well equiped PVP ship. How is this balanced? TO me it seems like you are just looking for the easy kills.
I have made the suggestion that local be changed. Take black ops ships and any ship that can use the covert ops out of the local channel. This is a huge buff to the current cloak. This means that unless you engage a target, no one would know you are in the area. Now that in itself is far too powerful and though I am sure it would be loved by the PVP player, I would hope you could agree it's not balanced.
So the scout ship comes into existance. This ship would need to be properly balanced for its role. It's a pretty fair trade if you ask me.
This idea increases PVP. It's an almost perfert promise that a cloak gang would score a kill every time they went on a roam. Industrials would have to be on gaurd far more, and be looking over their shoulder at any given moment. The mechanics I suggested for the scout ship leave it very limited on what it can and cant do. if you have a good scout, its unlikely that a successful gank will happen, UNLESS you destroy the scout. Once that ship is gone from system, then the cloaks would have a much larger advantage.
But it provides industrials the chance to respond. I wont fight you in a Hulk. There is no reason to even think thats worth it. But if I get a combat, I am undocked and quite ready to fight. This however puts the ball in your court. Are you willing to risk your ships against other combat ships? Are you willing to put your skills as a pilot out there? That's a decision you have to make.
This idea isnt perfect but I am honestly trying to think of a way to combat cloaky camping, and be fair on all sides.
You all seem to think I am just wanting to carebear it up with no risk. My plan suggestions nothing of the sort. It suggests that I want to come fight you but I wont do it when I know there is no chance of victory. No one would.
I am sure there are other things I need to answer as well. I will do that when I get home. |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
114
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 23:55:00 -
[145] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.
Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you.
GB2WoW |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1430
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 07:32:00 -
[146] - Quote
Voith wrote:Johan Toralen wrote:So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.
Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you. GB2WoW
Where are your demands that people sitting in a pos bubble or outpost get ejected and blown up, alt boy? |
Nariya Kentaya
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
633
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 08:18:00 -
[147] - Quote
Behr Oroo wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:no, afk cloaking is fine and just a result of local as OP intel tool.
afk cloaking just reflects the power of local back on its abusers, this is all right. So let's say that Local is taken from the game so that no one knows who is in system. The idea of my ship would be EVEN MORE needed cause then the cloakers would have true rule of every system. You wouldnt be able to undock from any station without fear of a cloaked group of players waiting on you. CCP would never allow this. WHY? cause people would start logging off and then simply stop playing. Wormholes, back when i lived with SYJ, we would have cloakies run through our system all the time, with no local, you know how we knew they were there? a combination of D-scan and them failing to gank our players who are fully prepared for the unexpected. All the while we continue on with our daily lives.
Frankly, a cloaky ship will always lose to a combat ship, even more so if he travels with a buddy. Cloaky ships are pre-nerfed already by being a cloaky. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
156
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 12:30:00 -
[148] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Voith wrote:Johan Toralen wrote:So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.
Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you. GB2WoW Where are your demands that people sitting in a pos bubble or outpost get ejected and blown up, alt boy?
PLEASE REFRAIN FROM THAT TYPE OF POST
We will not allow logic or reason to be used to counter a stupid idea. Please consider yourself a bad person. ;) |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
156
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 12:31:00 -
[149] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Behr Oroo wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:no, afk cloaking is fine and just a result of local as OP intel tool.
afk cloaking just reflects the power of local back on its abusers, this is all right. So let's say that Local is taken from the game so that no one knows who is in system. The idea of my ship would be EVEN MORE needed cause then the cloakers would have true rule of every system. You wouldnt be able to undock from any station without fear of a cloaked group of players waiting on you. CCP would never allow this. WHY? cause people would start logging off and then simply stop playing. Wormholes, back when i lived with SYJ, we would have cloakies run through our system all the time, with no local, you know how we knew they were there? a combination of D-scan and them failing to gank our players who are fully prepared for the unexpected. All the while we continue on with our daily lives. Frankly, a cloaky ship will always lose to a combat ship, even more so if he travels with a buddy. Cloaky ships are pre-nerfed already by being a cloaky.
Yeah but living in WH requires paying more attention to what is going on and people to work together. We can't have that type of stuff in NS. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
278
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 13:14:00 -
[150] - Quote
Any ideas along these lines needs to be tied to sov or it badly messes with other parts of the game where cloaking is working perfectly fine. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |