Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 17:04:00 -
[331]
Originally by: sharkyballs uh, you did?
In a completely different context to the one you mentioned?
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 17:06:00 -
[332]
It sounds like the problem I and others have with AFK cloaking, is that the cloakers can hinder other players while not actively in the game.
One possible solution would be to put a countdown timer (say 15 or 30min) and the timer must be clicked on to be refreshed. If it counts down to 0, you uncloak. That way there is ZERO negative effect on cloaks, but would stop people from AFK cloaking. Is there any reason this wouldn't work that anyone can think of?
I don't feel this is a dire need that must be changed, but if this were implemented I'd feel better about the whole cloaking matter.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive Animal.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 17:37:00 -
[333]
Originally by: Gorefacer That way there is ZERO negative effect on cloaks, but would stop people from AFK cloaking?
What difference does it make to gameplay whether they are afk or atk?
Neither state negates the responsibility of others to arm themselves against potential threats.
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 17:49:00 -
[334]
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds
Originally by: Gorefacer That way there is ZERO negative effect on cloaks, but would stop people from AFK cloaking?
What difference does it make to gameplay whether they are afk or atk?
Neither state negates the responsibility of others to arm themselves against potential threats.
The same difference AFK macro mining has to legitimate at keyboard mining. If your not there "in" the game, you shouldn't be able to accomplish a goal that would normally only come about by direct action on the players part. That is my opinion anyways.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 17:56:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Neither state negates the responsibility of others to arm themselves against potential threats.
Except if you're cloaked.
|
cuteboylookingatyou
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:02:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Neither state negates the responsibility of others to arm themselves against potential threats.
Except if you're cloaked.
Why would that remove your responsibility to arm yourself to a potential threat? Do you realize how dumb you sound?
|
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive Animal.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:08:00 -
[337]
Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 30/08/2007 18:08:46
Originally by: Gorefacer The same difference AFK macro mining has to legitimate at keyboard mining. If your not there "in" the game, you shouldn't be able to accomplish a goal that would normally only come about by direct action on the players part. That is my opinion anyways.
Meh.. I think it's unnecessary and lame tbh. It makes no difference to gameplay whether the player is afk or not, the attitude of others to a cloaked pilot would be the same either way and they would still be calling for more nerfs.
This would just irritate anyone who wants to cloak up while they go for a dump.
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:11:00 -
[338]
Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou Why would that remove your responsibility to arm yourself to a potential threat?
Defending yourself against a threat in eve can only be done effectively in two ways. You run away (not an option), or you remove the threat (impossible).
|
sharkyballs
Amarr Dkiller Delta Force Corp. Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:17:00 -
[339]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: sharkyballs uh, you did?
In a completely different context to the one you mentioned?
you said using the scanner was the counter to the cloak and my relpy to that was:
[Quote] because checking scanner is about like saying checking local, it's not a counter because your scanner doesn't pinpoint like a probe does. hence, it's flawed.
then you typed something off the wall about scanners picking up cloaks that was never mentioned
Quote: Who mentioned scanners? The fix specifically states that scanners will not pick up cloakers, but probes will (with an added amount of difficulty and innaccuracy). The lack of scanner means that you have to use every single probe, which means you need a near-max skilled probe pilot. This means teamwork, and effort.
then you stated that i took something out of context? try again.
all you're doing is treading water with your head barly above the surface by trying your best to bull**** your way to making a point.
anyone with any kind of cognitive thought can see your making blind alligations about a module that isn't broken.
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:20:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 30/08/2007 18:08:46
Originally by: Gorefacer The same difference AFK macro mining has to legitimate at keyboard mining. If your not there "in" the game, you shouldn't be able to accomplish a goal that would normally only come about by direct action on the players part. That is my opinion anyways.
Meh.. I think it's unnecessary and lame tbh. It makes no difference to gameplay whether the player is afk or not, the attitude of others to a cloaked pilot would be the same either way and they would still be calling for more nerfs.
This would just irritate anyone who wants to cloak up while they go for a dump.
Do you feel the same about Macro AFK mining? You could argue that if the person had time the macros are doing exactly what he would have done anyway, and so "makes no difference in gameplay". As far as I am concerned it is about a sense of fairplay and gaming on an even playing ground.
The primary consequence of having your ship blown up is loss of ISK. The primary consequence of having a cloaker(s) in system is annoyance/loss of ISK to ratters/miners/logistics. If someone found a way to blow other peoples' ships up (ISK loss) while completely AFK (at work, at the bar, etc.) I would have a problem with that also. They are loosely comparable as far as I can tell.
Plus I said the timer could be 30minutes, I would say most people can **** in that time.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
|
sharkyballs
Amarr Dkiller Delta Force Corp. Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:21:00 -
[341]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou Why would that remove your responsibility to arm yourself to a potential threat?
Defending yourself against a threat in eve can only be done effectively in two ways. You run away (not an option), or you remove the threat (impossible).
agian, it's just paranoia. if you don't know where he is, how do you call it a threat? last i checked paranoia was a valid tactic and seems to be working especially good on you. it's sad really. THERE IS A BOOGIE MAN!!!
|
sharkyballs
Amarr Dkiller Delta Force Corp. Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:23:00 -
[342]
Originally by: Gorefacer
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 30/08/2007 18:08:46
Originally by: Gorefacer The same difference AFK macro mining has to legitimate at keyboard mining. If your not there "in" the game, you shouldn't be able to accomplish a goal that would normally only come about by direct action on the players part. That is my opinion anyways.
Meh.. I think it's unnecessary and lame tbh. It makes no difference to gameplay whether the player is afk or not, the attitude of others to a cloaked pilot would be the same either way and they would still be calling for more nerfs.
This would just irritate anyone who wants to cloak up while they go for a dump.
Do you feel the same about Macro AFK mining? You could argue that if the person had time the macros are doing exactly what he would have done anyway, and so "makes no difference in gameplay". As far as I am concerned it is about a sense of fairplay and gaming on an even playing ground.
The primary consequence of having your ship blown up is loss of ISK. The primary consequence of having a cloaker(s) in system is annoyance/loss of ISK to ratters/miners/logistics. If someone found a way to blow other peoples' ships up (ISK loss) while completely AFK (at work, at the bar, etc.) I would have a problem with that also. They are loosely comparable as far as I can tell.
Plus I said the timer could be 30minutes, I would say most people can **** in that time.
cloaking is much different from macroing. you can't compare them because macros are outside programs being used. cloaking is in game and was a tool ccp created.
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:27:00 -
[343]
Originally by: sharkyballs
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou Why would that remove your responsibility to arm yourself to a potential threat?
Defending yourself against a threat in eve can only be done effectively in two ways. You run away (not an option), or you remove the threat (impossible).
agian, it's just paranoia. if you don't know where he is, how do you call it a threat? last i checked paranoia was a valid tactic and seems to be working especially good on you. it's sad really. THERE IS A BOOGIE MAN!!!
No.
If there is a hostile in system, and you don't know whether they are AFK or not, the intelligent course of action is to assume they are active and act accordingly (escorts - split profits etc - log off or dock - ISK loss). The other course of action will eventually lead to ship loss (also ISK loss). Either option you take will impede your ability to operate in your own system.
It's not paranoia, its not being cowardly. Any calculated decision you make is going to hurt you one way or the other. This is fine if the player is active and intending this consequence. Achieving this AFK with no way to stop it is as fundamentally wrong as using macros for any thing in this game or any other MMO. From my perspective at least.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:29:00 -
[344]
Originally by: sharkyballs
Originally by: Gorefacer
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 30/08/2007 18:08:46
Originally by: Gorefacer The same difference AFK macro mining has to legitimate at keyboard mining. If your not there "in" the game, you shouldn't be able to accomplish a goal that would normally only come about by direct action on the players part. That is my opinion anyways.
Meh.. I think it's unnecessary and lame tbh. It makes no difference to gameplay whether the player is afk or not, the attitude of others to a cloaked pilot would be the same either way and they would still be calling for more nerfs.
This would just irritate anyone who wants to cloak up while they go for a dump.
Do you feel the same about Macro AFK mining? You could argue that if the person had time the macros are doing exactly what he would have done anyway, and so "makes no difference in gameplay". As far as I am concerned it is about a sense of fairplay and gaming on an even playing ground.
The primary consequence of having your ship blown up is loss of ISK. The primary consequence of having a cloaker(s) in system is annoyance/loss of ISK to ratters/miners/logistics. If someone found a way to blow other peoples' ships up (ISK loss) while completely AFK (at work, at the bar, etc.) I would have a problem with that also. They are loosely comparable as far as I can tell.
Plus I said the timer could be 30minutes, I would say most people can **** in that time.
cloaking is much different from macroing. you can't compare them because macros are outside programs being used. cloaking is in game and was a tool ccp created.
It's a tool CCP created that lets players achieve active goals while AFK, much like macros do. Hence why I feel there should be a change thats disallows AFKing but does not compromise cloaks in any way.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
annoing
Amarr MisFunk Inc. Frontline.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:31:00 -
[345]
Originally by: Gorefacer
It's not paranoia, its not being cowardly.
Yes it is and yes it is. But dont worry, everyone is out to get you
Another total carebear with nothing to do other than cry.
|
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive Animal.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:31:00 -
[346]
Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 30/08/2007 18:32:18
Originally by: Gorefacer Do you feel the same about Macro AFK mining? You could argue that if the person had time the macros are doing exactly what he would have done anyway, and so "makes no difference in gameplay". As far as I am concerned it is about a sense of fairplay and gaming on an even playing ground.
Yeah ok, you've got a point there. But it's a minor point, because its merit is dependant upon the amount of gameplay effect a cloaked pilot is actually able to achieve.
That is a matter of hot debate upon which the central issues still all hinge.
Originally by: Gorefacer Plus I said the timer could be 30minutes, I would say most people can **** in that time.
nice
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:32:00 -
[347]
Just because CCP created Ravens that could fit dual MWDs does not mean that they should have stayed in game. That argument will not work.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:33:00 -
[348]
Originally by: Tommy TenKreds
Originally by: Gorefacer Do you feel the same about Macro AFK mining? You could argue that if the person had time the macros are doing exactly what he would have done anyway, and so "makes no difference in gameplay". As far as I am concerned it is about a sense of fairplay and gaming on an even playing ground.
Yeah ok, you've got a point there. But it's a minor point, because it's merit varies dependant upon the amount of gameplay effect a cloaked pilot is able to achieve.
That is a matter of hot debate upon which the central issues still all hinge.
Originally by: Gorefacer Plus I said the timer could be 30minutes, I would say most people can **** in that time.
nice
True, I'm mainly arguing it for arguments sake. Like I said before, if it doesn't change it won't wreck my world.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:34:00 -
[349]
Originally by: sharkyballs you said using the scanner was the counter to the cloak
Erm. No.
I said using the scanner was the counter to PROBES. I ask that you read before carrying on with your inane drivel.
|
Exlegion
KnightRaven Research KnightRaven Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:36:00 -
[350]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou Why would that remove your responsibility to arm yourself to a potential threat?
Defending yourself against a threat in eve can only be done effectively in two ways. You run away (not an option), or you remove the threat (impossible).
And how exactly would you defend yourself without a proper cloak against the following scenario?
I don't know if it's already been said, since I haven't read all 11 pages yet, but here are my thoughts on the issue:
Quote: I travel through NPC 0.0 sec. Sometimes I go 5 jumps without an NPC station to dock in. While traveling very aware of my surroundings and checking who's in the system (i.e. NOT AFK'ING), I'm being actively hunted, sometimes by roaming gangs of 10 vs my one self. They'll drop bubbles near all gates once they know I'm in the system (which by the way, what's the counter to bubbles? ). The only thing that keeps me alive is my cloak, PERIOD. Yeah yeah, "bring your own blob... blah blah". My point is cloaks have other uses besides cloaking and AFK'ing. There are no counters to bubbles, and no counters to blobs.
And before you give a response such as "travel in numbers", make sure it's not an answer I may repack and send back to you. Also, creating safe spots in systems I will only be traveling through isn't reasonable, considering trips sometimes include 30+ jumps.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Guru |
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:37:00 -
[351]
Originally by: Exlegion And how exactly would you defend yourself without a proper cloak against the following scenario?
As i answered earlier - you don't sit still and allow yourself to be probed out.
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:41:00 -
[352]
Originally by: annoing
Originally by: Gorefacer
It's not paranoia, its not being cowardly.
Yes it is and yes it is. But dont worry, everyone is out to get you
Another total carebear with nothing to do other than cry.
Do you have something to add to the debate? Or will you just continue to sling juvenille insults at people with different ideas than you?
I explained why it's not paranoia, I also explained why its not cowardly. "yes it is" is an exceptionally poor counter arguement and alludes to nothing but ignorance. Also I haven't done any type of carebearing in weeks due to nonstop PVP defending home system.
Show us your obvious cunning with your next reply.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Exlegion
KnightRaven Research KnightRaven Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:41:00 -
[353]
Edited by: Exlegion on 30/08/2007 18:42:42
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Exlegion And how exactly would you defend yourself without a proper cloak against the following scenario?
As i answered earlier - you don't sit still and allow yourself to be probed out.
I was being hunted through every celestial body in one system by 10+ players INCLUDING inties and other fast ships. It would have been only a matter of minutes before they caught up to me and locked me. Even when I cloaked they were hunting me by using their drones. Gates were bubbled and players on other sides just in case as well.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Guru |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:43:00 -
[354]
Originally by: Exlegion I was being hunted thRough every celestial body on one system by 10+ players INCLUDING inties and other fast ships. It would have been only a matter of minutes before they caught up to me and locked me. Even when I cloaked they were hunting me by using their drones.
You went through 10 celestial bodies and didn't make a single safe spot? Well. That was a bit silly of you.
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:47:00 -
[355]
Originally by: Gorefacer
If there is a hostile in system, and you don't know whether they are AFK or not, the intelligent course of action is to assume they are active and act accordingly (escorts - split profits etc - log off or dock - ISK loss). The other course of action will eventually lead to ship loss (also ISK loss). Either option you take will impede your ability to operate in your own system.
Here we go with the Carebear comments again.....
Everytime HighSec player whine about Jetcan theft, getting ganked, Suiciders, Lowsec not being profitable to mine in, etc guess what they are told? FLY WITH FRIENDS, Protect your miners, watch local, dock if there are hostiles, etc etc etc.... And when they claim it cuts their profits? Waaah, quit being a n00b and a Carebear.
You are in 0.0 space. Its supposed to be dangerous, you are supposed to have friendlies covering you. The excuse "someone we can't kill is hurting our profits because we can't mine/rat/haul alone" is NOT an excuse to nerf anything. Indeed its a reason to keep it the way it is; that whole risk vs. reward thing we get thrown in our face all the time.
Now not being able to secure a system where you have Sov I can understand to an extent, which is why I agree with the POS-based Sov required sensor arrays to help detect. If you are a renter and don't have Sov? Cry to your landlords, you don't "own" it.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Since this thread continues to fight against the people who derail it into the macro miners witchhunt. I will move it to features and ideas discussion where ...
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:47:00 -
[356]
I'm confused as to why people are resistant to my idea. It doesn't hurt the workings of any cloaks at all.
Originally that was the main response I heard, "dont nerf cloaks". This won't, just won't let you cloak in a system for more than 30min if your not at the keyboard. You could even make food, watch TV, and just click the timer once every 30min, but at least this way you can't go to sleep or work and stay like that 23/7.
Why would anyone like the idea of cloaking in a system AFK all day to the point of defending it on the forums if as you claim "it makes no difference to gameplay at all". In that case it should be a moot point, nobody would bother staying logged in while theyre at work cloaked in a system and they would just log.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:50:00 -
[357]
Originally by: Exlegion No. 10+ pPLAYERS, not Cel bodies. I wouldn't have made it to 10 spots in time. As soon as I entered system they went into hunting mode.
Good for them. A team of players using their skills as pilots to counter the cloaking module and your evasion tactics. I don't see a problem.
Originally by: sharkyballs yes, you are correct, i typed the word cloak when i meant to type the word probes. with probes in there my point was still made.
Is english your first language?
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:53:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Gorefacer I'm confused as to why people are resistant to my idea. It doesn't hurt the workings of any cloaks at all.
Some sort of pop-up that does NOT drop you from cloak before asking, is set at a decent time-frame to not interfere with Covert Ops (30 minutes you suggested) and doesn't break scans, warp, etc would be acceptable. It would nerf AFK players without breaking cloaking. It would have to move about the screen to make macroes harder, but no biggie.
They don't want that. They want the cloaks nerfed completely except for a select few that are using Coverts. They want to destroy modules, not balance. They want to Carebear in peace happily sitting behind bubble camps and warned by all-seeing Local intelligence.
Nerf AFKers, not cloaks.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Since this thread continues to fight against the people who derail it into the macro miners witchhunt. I will move it to features and ideas discussion where ...
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:57:00 -
[359]
Edited by: Elmicker on 30/08/2007 18:58:21
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Nerf AFKers, not cloaks.
AFKing is a legitimate tactic. AFKing while cloaked is imbalanced. Cloaking is a legitmate tactic. The AFK timer/confirmation fix affects all players adversely. Probing cloakers leaves 99.99% of cloakers unnaffected, but seriously hinders AFK cloakers. I honestly don't understand why you STILL think probing cloakers will ruin exploration. Just set your speed to 120m/s and you'll never be caught.
|
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:59:00 -
[360]
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Originally by: Gorefacer
If there is a hostile in system, and you don't know whether they are AFK or not, the intelligent course of action is to assume they are active and act accordingly (escorts - split profits etc - log off or dock - ISK loss). The other course of action will eventually lead to ship loss (also ISK loss). Either option you take will impede your ability to operate in your own system.
Here we go with the Carebear comments again.....
Everytime HighSec player whine about Jetcan theft, getting ganked, Suiciders, Lowsec not being profitable to mine in, etc guess what they are told? FLY WITH FRIENDS, Protect your miners, watch local, dock if there are hostiles, etc etc etc.... And when they claim it cuts their profits? Waaah, quit being a n00b and a Carebear.
You are in 0.0 space. Its supposed to be dangerous, you are supposed to have friendlies covering you. The excuse "someone we can't kill is hurting our profits because we can't mine/rat/haul alone" is NOT an excuse to nerf anything. Indeed its a reason to keep it the way it is; that whole risk vs. reward thing we get thrown in our face all the time.
Now not being able to secure a system where you have Sov I can understand to an extent, which is why I agree with the POS-based Sov required sensor arrays to help detect. If you are a renter and don't have Sov? Cry to your landlords, you don't "own" it.
Did you actually read my posts? I said the threat is fine, having to fly with friends is fine AS LONG AS THIS IS FORCED BY PEOPLE NOT AFK. AFK is the issue, not the "danger" of 0.0. Please do us all a favor and read all posts of a poster you are responding to.
Originally by: Gorefacer This is fine if the player is active and intending this consequence.
- From a later post, regarding forcing people to travel in groups etc etc.
Also I never asked for a nerf for ANYTHING. You missed on just about every "point" you made.
You sound all bitter about some other argument about high sec space. Don't get so emotional. That was another topic, it shouldn't dominate your mind while you drag it into other threads.
Also I currently DO NOT carebear at all. Was POS killing today and in roaming gangs the last couple days.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |