open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked """FUEL"""" for cloaks
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic

Draku Rykenen
Gallente
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.10 00:42:00 - [91]
 

I like it. add a "fuel bay" as suggested to avoid gimping the transports and give the cloak enough fuel efficiency to make fairly long term trips ( which would be longer for larger ships as their fuel bays could be larger ) and it is a win imo.

ships not "meant" to cloak will have no fuel bays at all and will need to make a further sacrifice of a bit of cargo space to operate the cloak, no biggy there in my view.

Need covert fleet recon? Cov ops frig is your man!

Need longer range, longer duration recon and observation? Call in the Black ops!

Tyriana McLoren
Caldari
The Republic of Free Trade
Posted - 2010.07.10 00:53:00 - [92]
 

Edited by: Tyriana McLoren on 10/07/2010 00:56:30
So, let us get this all straight shall we?
As stated by numerous people previously, you are upset that an 'AFK Cloaker' is in 'your' 0.0 system?
There are so many things wrong with that statement it is almost mind numbing. So, this person who is AFK is doing exactly WHAT to you? Riiiight... nothing. So if you make it so people can't AFK when they choose to do so, then I'm assuming you would be quite happy with your buddies (carebears in 0.0 space) wouldn't mind also getting some sort of penalty for afking while their strip miners are running on those big rocks right?

Or better yet, let's go back to the part where you think that his particular 0.0 system actually belongs to you. Umm, it doesn't. It's open territory for anybody to come along and slap you silly and take it from you. A person who is AFK isn't going to shoot you... they are AFK.

I have to agree with the others here that I don't see anything wrong with this 'issue' as you have stated it. I don't condone AFK-cloaking, but I don't really see it as an issue/problem. How is it any different than someone AFKing in a system inside a station and you not knowing if they are in a station, or cloaked, or roasting marshmellows on the burning flames of your carebear corp mate's flaming ships? You wouldn't, because you obviously have NO idea what it means to live out in 0.0 space which is why you started this thread in the first place.
And I'm certain that by the time this post reached the OP's second post, he opted to go start a thread somewhere else to try and raise sympathy some other way.

NO the cloak ships don't need any sort of bull **** fuel or any other sort of compensation. As stated before, the cloak is the defense for these usually paper thin ships. And worrying about a person who is AFK is just silly anyway.

One also has to ask... how exactly do you know he/she is AFK? Did they tell you they were AFK?

Seriously, get out of 0.0, go back to farming Veld in highsec and running cheap L4s where it is 'safe' for you to do so.

p.s. I wish local in 0.0 would disappear. Would change many many things out there.

captain foivos
Posted - 2010.07.10 00:58:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: Tyriana McLoren

Or better yet, let's go back to the part where you think that his particular 0.0 system actually belongs to you. Umm, it doesn't.



Someone's never had to pay a sovereignty bill before, have they. Rolling Eyes

Tyriana McLoren
Caldari
The Republic of Free Trade
Posted - 2010.07.10 00:59:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: captain foivos
Originally by: Tyriana McLoren

Or better yet, let's go back to the part where you think that his particular 0.0 system actually belongs to you. Umm, it doesn't.



Someone's never had to pay a sovereignty bill before, have they. Rolling Eyes
That still doesn't mean anything. You can still lose 'your' system. Rolling Eyes

Draku Rykenen
Gallente
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.10 01:20:00 - [95]
 

Ermm, Tyr..

Firstly, don't you think it adds some interesting dynamics to spying? Secondly, it is annoying to have a perma-invincible, untraceable, alt hovering in system. It would affect all players equally so no problem there.

I think it adds a layer to the spy game and to some degree means that the people carrying out recon of enemy systems will actually have to make an effort to do so, win for all imo.

I wouldn't think it would be an insane change.. the fuel could last for hours in a frig and maybe a couple of days in a black ops, but at least there would have to be SOME sort of EFFORT made to observe the activity in a system.

As it is, you can leave an alt anywhere with total impunity..

As for "carebears" that you suggest don't pay a price for AFK'ing.. that hulk is not untraceable nor unable to be targeted. It also costs a lot more to lose than a cov ops.

TheMahdi
Posted - 2010.07.10 02:19:00 - [96]
 

I wonder how the OP would handle W-space, probs cry about no local.

Why is someone crying when they are well aware of a reds presence?

Tyriana McLoren
Caldari
The Republic of Free Trade
Posted - 2010.07.10 10:24:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Draku Rykenen
Ermm, Tyr..

Firstly, don't you think it adds some interesting dynamics to spying?
No, I think it adds some annoying aspect to spying. As stated above, ALL ships would need a serious rethinking because there is no way a SB alone would be able to cope with this change due to the size of the bombs, and other ammo they have to carry, as well as the cloaky haulers.
Quote:
Secondly, it is annoying to have a perma-invincible, untraceable, alt hovering in system. It would affect all players equally so no problem there.
Perma invincible? It's not like they are actually DOING anything but sitting there.. I'm perma invincible in a station aren't I? So are you. That is the design behind the cloak.. untraceable. Good grief... don't you all understand what a CLOAK is?

Quote:
I think it adds a layer to the spy game and to some degree means that the people carrying out recon of enemy systems will actually have to make an effort to do so, win for all imo.

I wouldn't think it would be an insane change.. the fuel could last for hours in a frig and maybe a couple of days in a black ops, but at least there would have to be SOME sort of EFFORT made to observe the activity in a system.

As it is, you can leave an alt anywhere with total impunity..

As for "carebears" that you suggest don't pay a price for AFK'ing.. that hulk is not untraceable nor unable to be targeted. It also costs a lot more to lose than a cov ops.
Yes I am fully aware that AFKing in a Hulk can net you a loss as you can be scanned and targeted, but that was not my point. If someone is going to harp on people being AFK, they have to harp on ALL people being AFK.. not just the ones that affect you/him/her/them. That is called Biased and is not a rational argument.

Overall, as I said, I think there is no problem here. You speak of adding some sort of actual aspect to cloaking and recon as though that will be better for everyone... suppose you are the only one who thinks this way? What about the haulers? They have to pay a price of fuel or whatever as well because they need to haul just because someone else is AFK?
I think it is all fine the way it is. 0.0 people need more people to populate their system. Period. You are in a very high risk area and are wanting the risk removed. If a (what I see as a drastic) change is made to cloaks in this fashion, I would be among the others demanding that Local be removed totally as a fair and balanced act of justification.

L8rz

Johnny May
Posted - 2010.07.10 11:29:00 - [98]
 

uhm, how is cloaking related to spying?
if im a spy, im in your corp, reading your corpchat, listening
to your voice on teamspeak when you are whining drunk about cloakers,
an laugh at you.
and if the target is worth burning the character
i'll drop a cyno right next to you in a passive tanked drake -
so it lasts a while - and you wont expect it to happen until
it happens. doh.

when im a cloaker, you can see me in local, you know you are not safe,
and clearly im not spying there (or are you guys putting corp internas in local?
if so, maybe i should actually hang out in your systems instead of putting efford
in spying on you).


Diggs Lonewalker
Posted - 2010.07.10 11:54:00 - [99]
 

Edited by: Diggs Lonewalker on 10/07/2010 11:55:08
Cloaks do require fuel. They are passively fueled by other ships being in the same system as they are. Much like a solar panel, a cloaking system requires another player to be in the same system to radiate Fear(tm). Fear(tm) is a micro-sub-atomic particle that cloaking devices absorb and convert in to Dark(tm). Dark(tm) is the emitted around the ship which renders it invisible.

However, much like the audio perception issues of a tree falling in an unoccupied forest, one has to realize that a cloaked ship is not cloaked if there is nobody else in the system with the cloaky pilot. Cloaking systems are designed by the same people that make refrigerator lighting systems. Like opening the door to test the light, it is not possible to enter a system with a cloaky ship present fast enough to not see the cloak... well more properly to see the cloud of Dark(tm).

Now some might argue that a cloaked pilot alone in system is seeing his cloaking cloud of Dark(tm) while alone in system. The manufacturer reminds the operator that this is like trying to test the lighting system from the inside of the refrigerator and he should remember to breathe and to stop sitting in the butter dish.

One cautionary note on this whole issue is that of the pod pilot with multiple personality disorder and chronic paranoia. Do not leave your ship, ever. Your second personality can caused a Fear(tm) feedback loop which will generate a Dark(tm) cloud. Pilots who have experienced this have complained, in stereo and sometimes 3 part harmonies, that they forgot where they parked and could not find their ship.

-Diggs

Vee Raa
Minmatar
Cadre Assault Force
Posted - 2010.07.10 12:59:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Diggs Lonewalker

Cloaks do require fuel. They are passively fueled by other ships being in the same system as they are. Much like a solar panel, a cloaking system requires another player to be in the same system to radiate Fear(tm). Fear(tm) is a micro-sub-atomic particle that cloaking devices absorb and convert in to Dark(tm). Dark(tm) is the emitted around the ship which renders it invisible.

However, much like the audio perception issues of a tree falling in an unoccupied forest, one has to realize that a cloaked ship is not cloaked if there is nobody else in the system with the cloaky pilot. Cloaking systems are designed by the same people that make refrigerator lighting systems. Like opening the door to test the light, it is not possible to enter a system with a cloaky ship present fast enough to not see the cloak... well more properly to see the cloud of Dark(tm).

Now some might argue that a cloaked pilot alone in system is seeing his cloaking cloud of Dark(tm) while alone in system. The manufacturer reminds the operator that this is like trying to test the lighting system from the inside of the refrigerator and he should remember to breathe and to stop sitting in the butter dish.

One cautionary note on this whole issue is that of the pod pilot with multiple personality disorder and chronic paranoia. Do not leave your ship, ever. Your second personality can caused a Fear(tm) feedback loop which will generate a Dark(tm) cloud. Pilots who have experienced this have complained, in stereo and sometimes 3 part harmonies, that they forgot where they parked and could not find their ship.

-Diggs



WIN Very Happy

tsukubasteve
The Park Bench
Posted - 2010.07.10 15:13:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Khanoonian Singh
Are you really that afraid of an afk cloaker? You have no home defense or operations security set up?

Here is a fix- remove local, then you won't have to see the scary AFK cloaker.


Signed.. I say we move to a Wormhole style local system in all low-sec and 0.0 space.

Hiroshima Jita
Posted - 2010.07.10 17:20:00 - [102]
 

I like how its always the cloaky pilots that want to remove local. they know a good thing when they see one. For them anyway.

AFK cloakies aren't much of a problem. Lotta options to combat that. Align out at all times. Snipe the rats from safespots, while aligned out. PVE in a PVP fit battleship with a heavy neut and a backup flight of ECM drones. Rat in the next system over. If the space is really *YOURS* erect a cynojammer so that the single afk cloaker can't multiply easily. Rat in a fleet. Keep a falcon alt nearby. Bait the cloaker to his death.

And to the people who want to remove local. As soon as one of you comes up with an easy to implement set of tools for someone to gather intel not using local then I'll support you. Until then, your desire to buff the blob further can go **** itself.

Draku Rykenen
Gallente
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.10 17:30:00 - [103]
 

Ok, well, we have different views. I still like the idea. It really has nothing to do with fear. It has to do with the idea that observing a system should take some effort and not be impossible to stop. I could just as easily say that you are afraid that your alts might have to refuel and you might miss a gate camp on that side of the gate and lose a ship once in a blue moon. I think you SHOULD have to make that effort and take that risk.

It certainly adds a layer of thought and planning and that layer is actually thinnest for the cloaky alt that just sits in system, it would actually affect long range fleets and combat deployments much more than the observer.

Despite that fact I would love to see it. There are more things in this vein that I would like to see too, including the need for ammunition transport to keep larger fleets operating effectively. These aren't all "make my life simple" things, i just enjoy tactical dynamics and I feel that cloak fuel would be a nice one.

Pyro Ninja
Gallente
Viral Industry
Posted - 2010.07.10 18:11:00 - [104]
 

Edited by: Pyro Ninja on 10/07/2010 18:12:54
Really people need to stop crying about cloaking. They are doing what they are meant to do to gather intell and the poor null sec carebears that set up pos's are worried people will shoot at them. Stop crying get over it and learn to secure your jump gates.

It's like telling the RL stealth bombers they have to yell POLO!! every so often cuz its unfair that they people who want to kill them can't seem to find him.

Please just shut up and die.



Tyriana McLoren
Caldari
The Republic of Free Trade
Posted - 2010.07.10 23:55:00 - [105]
 

Edited by: Tyriana McLoren on 10/07/2010 23:55:34

Larry Wickes
Posted - 2010.07.11 02:33:00 - [106]
 

As we all know in one of the original Star Trek movies Kirk (The best captain in Star Trek) encounters a 24/7 cloaker (Bird of Prey that can fire weapons while cloaked!!!) and, using the ships scanners finds a signature emitting from no where, thus he concluded that was the location of the cloaked Bird of Prey and fired his Photon Torpedoes!!!

As a cloak emits some kind of energy/radiation whatever, in order to shield the ship from a human's visible spectrum, it should be possible that a device exists and is able to detect these energies that are above/below our bodies capability.

I suggest another class of ship "Seekers" the only ship class capable of fielding a "Cloak detection device I/II". Essentially a scanning device designed to locate and pinpoint cloaked ships. The scan should take 1-2 minutes to be fair.

After all, if we can cloak our ships, we obviously understand the physics on how to create the cloak in the first place, and in the second place we then MUST also know how to detect these cloaks.

Diggs Lonewalker
Posted - 2010.07.11 05:11:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: Diggs Lonewalker on 11/07/2010 05:14:16


You seem to have clicked on the wrong link, Star Trek Online is a different game. However, since you want to apply something roughy based on some sort of scientific aspect to this little event, lets take a hypothetical look at what you are trying to do.

You want a system to, effectively via a passive detection system of some sort, accurately track down and find a cloaked ship 'somewhere' in an area, to be fair and assuming that no 'deep safe' exists of about 50 AU long, 20 AU across, and 5 AU deep. I think it would be fair to say an area about that size would represent the average 'flyable area' in which you can expect to find a ship in a star system. So that works out to 500 cubic AU in which to find this ship.

Back to Star Trek. There are several cases of the cloak being used, and in some later events, even with that over glorified protocol droid 'Data' they had to admit that the cloak was 'just too good'. Anyhow, in almost all cases the cloaked ship was detected within, heck we'll call it 1 million km of the ship (and that is being generous). That would be a cube (because I don't want to do the math on a sphere) with an area of 8 million cubic kilometers or about 1/200,000,000,000,000,000,000 (2.0x10^20) the size you are saying you want to track down in 1 to 2 minutes?

Lets put that in to scale. That is like saying you want to isolate a single hydrogen molecule in an area the size of Iceland... in 120 seconds. All because your toon read a pamphlet and plugged in a metal detector set in to a slot on his ship.

And those numbers are just to track the ship down to within 1,000,000 km.

Anyhow, that is enough math on that end.

The game mechanic right now is not broken. You may not like it, but there are penalties to using a cloaking system. The counter-mechanic is to either fight or run away.

Perhaps looking at your idea in a scaled down, and somewhat more 'realistic' point would be to allow for a system that could potentially warn a pod pilot of a 'possible chance' of a nearby cloaking ship.

So, it would be a high-slot detection system that would run like a salvaging unit with a 20-30 second cycle time. Its range would be 20km + 20km per level of skill (Sciaphobia Skill) with a chance warning of a cloaked ship nearby. Upon detection, which would not warn the cloaked pilot, it is a passive system, the target would appear in the overview for the finder to either approach or avoid (the cloaked ship would not be directly targettable).

TL;DR version. This isn't Star Trek, the mechanic works fine, there is nothing wrong.

-Diggs (this message brought to you by Insomnia(tm))

Qwert0
Posted - 2010.07.11 07:12:00 - [108]
 

Why not instead of fuel, slowly and randomly cause heat damage to the cloak?

You have 'fuel' with nanite paste, and if they go afk too long they burn out the cloak and are SOL until they hit a station.

Larry Wickes
Posted - 2010.07.11 15:33:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Diggs Lonewalker
Edited by: Diggs Lonewalker on 11/07/2010 05:14:16


You seem to have clicked on the wrong link, Star Trek Online is a different game. However, since you want to apply something roughy based on some sort of scientific aspect to this little event, lets take a hypothetical look at what you are trying to do.

You want a system to, effectively via a passive detection system of some sort, accurately track down and find a cloaked ship 'somewhere' in an area, to be fair and assuming that no 'deep safe' exists of about 50 AU long, 20 AU across, and 5 AU deep. I think it would be fair to say an area about that size would represent the average 'flyable area' in which you can expect to find a ship in a star system. So that works out to 500 cubic AU in which to find this ship.

Back to Star Trek. There are several cases of the cloak being used, and in some later events, even with that over glorified protocol droid 'Data' they had to admit that the cloak was 'just too good'. Anyhow, in almost all cases the cloaked ship was detected within, heck we'll call it 1 million km of the ship (and that is being generous). That would be a cube (because I don't want to do the math on a sphere) with an area of 8 million cubic kilometers or about 1/200,000,000,000,000,000,000 (2.0x10^20) the size you are saying you want to track down in 1 to 2 minutes?

Lets put that in to scale. That is like saying you want to isolate a single hydrogen molecule in an area the size of Iceland... in 120 seconds. All because your toon read a pamphlet and plugged in a metal detector set in to a slot on his ship.

And those numbers are just to track the ship down to within 1,000,000 km.

Anyhow, that is enough math on that end.

The game mechanic right now is not broken. You may not like it, but there are penalties to using a cloaking system. The counter-mechanic is to either fight or run away.

Perhaps looking at your idea in a scaled down, and somewhat more 'realistic' point would be to allow for a system that could potentially warn a pod pilot of a 'possible chance' of a nearby cloaking ship.

So, it would be a high-slot detection system that would run like a salvaging unit with a 20-30 second cycle time. Its range would be 20km + 20km per level of skill (Sciaphobia Skill) with a chance warning of a cloaked ship nearby. Upon detection, which would not warn the cloaked pilot, it is a passive system, the target would appear in the overview for the finder to either approach or avoid (the cloaked ship would not be directly targettable).

TL;DR version. This isn't Star Trek, the mechanic works fine, there is nothing wrong.

-Diggs (this message brought to you by Insomnia(tm))


Well, thanks for putting it into perspective. I didn't really think about it that much. Also, I don't play Star Trek Online. I love just love the tv series, however, I haven't watched much of TNG.

Anyway, you made a good argument. Don't get me wrong, I also love cloaks and your idea sounds interesting. I do feel there should be some method of detecting a cloak, however, it may not be incredibly accurate.

Annie Anomie
Shadows Of The Federation
Posted - 2010.07.11 19:18:00 - [110]
 

They run on (macro) ratter tears tbh.

Eli's Messenger
Posted - 2010.07.11 20:13:00 - [111]
 

What if they make a rig that shows that there is a cloaker on grid but doesn't give you anything other than their ship type, just to let you know if there actually watching.

Make it so that fitting this rig or a module if it was a module requires a skill and the higher the skill the better quality of cloak it can detect, so if you train to level 1 you can see there is a prototype cloaked ship and if you train to 5 maybe you can see covert ops cloaks, but either way it only lets you know they are on grid and thus actually watching you.

Could also let the cloaked pilot's cloaking skill attribute to whatever calculation it makes so that maybe a hard core cloaked scout with cloaking at 5 with a cov ops cloak couldn't be seen by it at all.


Sorry for wall of text and probable spelling/grammar errors.

Murkelost
Gallente
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.10.09 12:06:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: BC Tank


What i want to do with this post is inform CCP that this game mechanic isnt worth the title game play, at some point it need to change for a more challenging option.




The only fail about cloak these days is that any ship can use them. Limit it to the ships that are made for it, recons etc.
That would make being in 0.0 a challenge for those non cloaky muppets.

And oh in regard of the cloak part of the game, remove local chat Wink

Murkelost
Gallente
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.10.09 12:11:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Midnight Firestarter
Cloakers need to cloak and stay cloaked .... everything else shouldn't be able to fit them ....



This!

Murkelost
Gallente
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.10.09 12:15:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Omarvelous
Sorry - I don't want to remove a mechanic that allows for sneak attacks. Anytime the average ratter sees local go up - they warp to a safe and cloak up. AFK cloaking and you can't assume the guy is there watching you or not, there is the possibility of getting ganked.

Keep the AFK cloaker and remove local. That's my vote.


/signed

Only place that recons etc are justified these days are in wormhole systems where there simply is no local.
The local chat mechanic is therefore in need of a overhaul regard to this since a cloak class ship in most cases is totally useless since their presence gets exposed in the local window in regular systems. Idea

Azver Deroven
Amarr
Pitch Black.
Shadow Cartel
Posted - 2010.10.09 14:20:00 - [115]
 

Quite frankly this thread had me startled for a moment, fuel for my stealthbomber that already takes 500'000-700'000 isk per cycle and can carry max of 4 charges?

Or are you afraid torpedoes from a single afk cloaker? Yes Im certain that volley hurts you before you warp off or kill me.

I understand for recons and blackops this is difrent, and t3 cloakers, but when you think about it, recon is -just- a cruiser hull with less dps, and most often than not, less tank.

It cannot kill you alone in 0.0 before your buddies SHOULD come to help.

For example: Killed a 'poon, then for some reason found loki 'n geddon that werent in safe after first kill in the system so we engaged. Breaking the loki was taxing as he was rather tanky, and even geddon didnt instapop under the fire. Only support they got was one, I trust it was basilisk, warping in 30 seconds after both were dead.

This is not to demonstrate hotdrop superiority; This is to demonstrate sad state where game is when your corp mates get attacked and (62 in local) no-one comes to help.

Earlier carrier attempts have all fallen to the fact that they get support. Thats the way its MENT to be done; You're in trouble, you shout for help, your mates come help you off.

Why did I just tell you that? I told you that because there IS a valid counter for hotdrops that, far as I can tell, is only reason you should fear afk cloakers. That is your buddies. If you're to fly in 0.0 I trust you did not set sov. up alone, I trust you did not move there on your own; No, you moved there as a part of whole. Then that whole should come to your support when you need it. If you are soloratting in a t3 / BS / BC / Carrier in a system with 0 friendlies, well beside your cyno alt (mebbe), and a hostile warps in, you get the hell out. Or you deserve whats comming at you.

Also do not claim that you did not notice the intel channel and gang of 10 moving trough systems with covert ops cloaks. If you REALLY have no intel, I dont think its game mechanics to blame, not with current local.

Its a mix of many things but black ops are counterable; One blackops cannot stand toe to toe with its non-cloaky variant. If we have a gang, you're soloing, should we not be able to kill you? But if you're in a gang as well, I know we cannot kill you. -THAT- is the price for cloak.

I'd be actually happy to go with sonar type anti-cloak module for specialized ship class if it would be, say, 50km range, and even then not immediate. And that under the condition we get delayed local. That would force recons to warp to further away to check the status of said ship; But that I trust is not the point of this discussion.

Cedo Nulli
Posted - 2010.10.09 17:12:00 - [116]
 

If you have control over 0.0 system you should have a paper for every rock so to speak.

Every hostile move should have a defensive move available, not using the system is not one.

For those lolling about "so what", that cloaker essentially an enemy combatant gathering info and waiting to call in buddies when moment is right. There should be a way to root him out. Doesent have to be easy or cheap but it should be doable nevertheless.

Cloak should not be an automatic "cant touch this" button in 0.0 it can be that in low and in high but not in owned 0.0

Azver Deroven
Amarr
Pitch Black.
Shadow Cartel
Posted - 2010.10.09 17:48:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Cedo Nulli
If you have control over 0.0 system you should have a paper for every rock so to speak.

Every hostile move should have a defensive move available, not using the system is not one.

For those lolling about "so what", that cloaker essentially an enemy combatant gathering info and waiting to call in buddies when moment is right. There should be a way to root him out. Doesent have to be easy or cheap but it should be doable nevertheless.

Cloak should not be an automatic "cant touch this" button in 0.0 it can be that in low and in high but not in owned 0.0

Did you intentionally ignore me?

It is not godmode on its own, and 10 man blackops fleet will probably not engage 5 man unless they're doing something seriously wrong. If they do engage; Theres very high chance that you'll be around and get kills, meanwhile your corp will be comming to help.

And if its a single blackops with ZERO intel on roaming blackops gang, then that single cloaker is not a threat as he will not be able to blow you up before you can call for backup, or blow him yourself.

If you only take scenario where it'll stay as 1v1, and you're in zerosec as holding sov., you're doing something wrong.

Do correct me if Im wrong tho, but if you do not have anyone to help or no intel, you're doing something wrong?

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.10.09 18:19:00 - [118]
 

GOD YES!

Make sense balance wise and prevents ****-***ging.

Cause no ship in EVE should be invulnerable.

Induc
Amarr
Posted - 2010.10.09 18:40:00 - [119]
 

AFK cloaking is just a result of a poor intel gathering system: local makes stealth attacks impossible - afk cloaking counters this.

Fuel for cloaks won't solve the real problem...


Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Cause no ship in EVE should be invulnerable.
I suppose that includes afk macro ratters?

Bibosikus
Gallente
Posted - 2010.10.09 18:53:00 - [120]
 

There's nothing wrong with cloaking. It's AFK cloaking which is the root of this particular thread. AFK anything is, imho, just wrong. Eve is an MMO, a game of interaction. Macro ratters, macro miners and AFK cloakers should all be put up against a wall. All they're doing is basically acting like a bunch of NPC's with varying degrees of irritation attached that goad people into posting threads like this.

AFK cloakers don't always solo of course. I've seen 3 in one system, just sitting there for over a week. The level of psychological warfare that achieves is an order of magnitude above a solo.

But as long as Eve is a point-click, macros will abound. As long as we can have multiple accounts (that will NEVER change thankyou CCP) we will have AFK-ers.







Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only