open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Give us the TOOLS to defeat CLOAKY GRIEFERS!!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 : last (15)

Author Topic

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.15 20:46:00 - [391]
 

Edited by: Rhadia on 15/09/2010 20:47:44
Originally by: Mark Hadden
curious, some people say 0.0 is safer than empire. In some regions its true.
There is no risk in many things in eve, risk vs. reward is a lie in many many cases; so for cloaking its the same.


Risk Vs Reward is true for a lot of things in Eve, Hadden, and it's a terrible excuse to think any of us should be safe from that simple philosophy. It's what the entire game is based on.

0.0 Having deep pockets far from any enemy is not a problem particularly with the PVP of the game, but the sovereignty system and how it promotes pvp, which is an entirely different discussion.

The people who say 0.0 is safer than Empire are really quite wrong.

Look, there's a lot of things I'd like to change about PVP to make it more reasonable, and most of those would make stealth bombers far more useful in the field. Unfortunately, I don't think it's a wise choice to try to change it all at once.

As far as current mechanics go, using a very simple set of tactics, CovOps ships/cloakies have found way to become essentially invulnerable with very little risk to themselves. That's why I'm arguing here to solve the one thing that makes them play unfairly, which is the unlimited nature of their cloak.

In the end all I want to see is equal effort on both ends to both attack, or defend. Right now there is a large tilt in the scales lending every bit of effort only to the defender while the attacker sits back and does nothing- This is what is unfair. This is all that I wish to change.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2010.09.15 21:15:00 - [392]
 

Edited by: Glyken Touchon on 15/09/2010 21:20:42
Originally by: Rhadia
In the end all I want to see is equal effort on both ends to both attack, or defend. Right now there is a large tilt in the scales lending every bit of effort only to the defender while the attacker sits back and does nothing- This is what is unfair. This is all that I wish to change.


If they're AFK they aren't attacking.. no effort, but nothing gained.no risk, but no reward.
If they're not AFK, you say you don't have a problem?

A red/non-blue should affect how you act in a system, but most people seem to over-react and want to dock up/cease operations altogether.

Reminds me of the flash for RMR- the bit about Big Blue

edit- link failure

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.15 21:32:00 - [393]
 

Originally by: Glyken Touchon
If they're AFK they aren't attacking.. no effort, but nothing gained.no risk, but no reward.
If they're not AFK, you say you don't have a problem?


-sigh- Lemme say it again: They do accomplish things while AFK. Derp. We've said this repeatedly. It's obvious the use of going afk, so don't pretend they're not accomplishing anything while they aren't at the computer.

Going afk forces anyone serious about defending to either:
A. Let them through the gate- Let them attack a player when you're unprepared to assist.
B. Remain 100% active and ready to try to catch them, defend your friends while they're not even at the computer.

Risk vs Reward? The reward is absolutely forcing your enemy to adhere to rules you impose upon them when there is absolutely no risk to them in exchange.

Xorv
Posted - 2010.09.15 22:00:00 - [394]
 

Originally by: Rhadia
Originally by: Glyken Touchon
If they're AFK they aren't attacking.. no effort, but nothing gained.no risk, but no reward.
If they're not AFK, you say you don't have a problem?


-sigh- Lemme say it again: They do accomplish things while AFK. Derp. We've said this repeatedly. It's obvious the use of going afk, so don't pretend they're not accomplishing anything while they aren't at the computer.

Going afk forces anyone serious about defending to either:
A. Let them through the gate- Let them attack a player when you're unprepared to assist.
B. Remain 100% active and ready to try to catch them, defend your friends while they're not even at the computer.

Risk vs Reward? The reward is absolutely forcing your enemy to adhere to rules you impose upon them when there is absolutely no risk to them in exchange.


- Double Sigh - Rolling Eyes

As has been said over and over and over again, all these "problems" you list are a result of you having super easy intel via Local Chat. Which is itself unbalanced.

You want complete control of your gaming environment, want to zerg people at gates, and PvE more safely than Empire... Then you have the nerve to talk about Risk vs Reward in regard to AFK cloakers.

AFK cloakers aren't "forcing" you to do anything, although your right it would be wise to be on guard for an attack, but this is 0 Security space were talking about. When/if the cloaker does attack they aren't AFK and they aren't cloaked, and unless fighting against fools their actions most certainly are not risk free.

Etrias Jhozah
Adhocracy Incorporated
Posted - 2010.09.15 22:56:00 - [395]
 

OMG! Everyone now puts a cloak on their ship and sits in space then walks away from their PC because that's the automatic "I win" button for EVE! Everyone flies cloaky ships now and no one in space can see anything except for all the icons in local.

Oh wait, that's right, that's not happening at all.

Nice hijack of the thread Allestin and Rhadia. Take a thread that had all it's momentum built up on the General forum before being moved to F&ID where it was supposed to die a nice quiet death, then you two show up with your personal vendetta's to pursue claiming that there's some "groundswell" of support of your positions. But all I see is the same two arguing with, oh I don't know, everyone else about the same old, same old.

I tried to be nice talking with you guys, but now it just seems that you got butt-hurt by some cloaker who ganked you. So, did you lose faction gear, is that it? What was it that made you snap? Because no matter that pilot after pilot who are in 0.0 and say there's nothing wrong with cloaking, you still are saying the same f-ing thing. You have so many holes in your arguments, sieve manufacturers are clamoring for your contact information.

If you two are going to troll like this, make it easy on us and just CTRL-C/CTRL-V because your arguments are nothing more than rehashes from other threads.

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.15 23:04:00 - [396]
 

Edited by: Rhadia on 15/09/2010 23:16:22
Originally by: Xorv
As has been said over and over and over again, all these "problems" you list are a result of you having super easy intel via Local Chat. Which is itself unbalanced.
Yet here you are arguing that something else is broken.

Dictated by current game mechanics, this tactic is unfair, unchallengeable, and abused. I would absolutely love to see local removed and I've argued it in many cases, but as it is right now both CCP and I understand the drastic changes that would take hold of how people play the game in 0.0. They don't want people ragequitting even if they are whiny carebears, that is why removing local is dangerous.

Originally by: Xorv
You want complete control of your gaming environment, want to zerg people at gates, and PvE more safely than Empire... Then you have the nerve to talk about Risk vs Reward in regard to AFK cloakers.

No, no, and no. And you have the nerve to talk about risk vs reward when the only thing you are defending here is something that allows you to reap reward with no risk to yourself.
Originally by: Xorv
AFK cloakers aren't "forcing" you to do anything, although your right it would be wise to be on guard for an attack, but this is 0 Security space were talking about. When/if the cloaker does attack they aren't AFK and they aren't cloaked, and unless fighting against fools their actions most certainly are not risk free.

AFK Cloakers are making rules when no real rules can be applied to them. They have total control of their situation, so much so that a pilot can kick his feet back and fap furiously without bothering to look at his screen for about an hour or twelve and know for a fact that nothing can/will happen to him.

Remind me again what cloaker will attack a ship that has the ability to tackle them.
Remind me again how long it takes a stealth bomber to warp off as soon as a real tackle threat arrives.
Remind me again how this means that they are in ANY danger while attacking a target that they chose in the first place.

Believe me, I absolutely understand why the majority of cloaky/griefer/bomber pilots are so active in these forums. It's become apparent that there is so little danger... so little excitement in piloting these ships that the only satisfaction to be gained is their KB stats and the tears they have desperately tried to harvest right here on these forums. Forums they're probably browsing while they sit cloaked in a system, no less, but that's probably simple speculation on my part.

Don't play me for a fool. I am a bomber pilot myself, and I have been since a month or so after started the game. I have been on the attacking, and defending ends of covert PVP and believe me when I understand the grievances of both sides.

I am not here to make stealth bombers lame and useless. I'm here to ensure they play on the same grounds as every other player in Eve and they aren't reduced further into the dust by pathetic tactics like this. Eve is a passive game as it is- We don't need cloaked alts leading the war effort simply because it's such a viable tactic. This is the wrong direction for Covert PVP and you all need to realize this.

Nice flame bait, Etrias, but unfortunately you're absolutely wrong. I've never been threatened by a cloaky in system personally, nor have I ever lost even 1 isk because of their efforts. On the contrary, it HAS, however, always been my duty to defend against them with my comrades. As such it's become apparent how effortless it is for bomber pilots to play their risk-free PVP game while those of us serious about defense of space are left in the dust- either having to put forth far more effort into the defense than they do to initiate an attack, or simply letting them roam free effortlessly.

Mark Hadden
Amarr
Endstati0n
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.09.15 23:43:00 - [397]
 

Edited by: Mark Hadden on 16/09/2010 00:00:47
Originally by: Rhadia

Risk Vs Reward is true for a lot of things in Eve, Hadden, and it's a terrible excuse to think any of us should be safe from that simple philosophy.

and for many it does not apply.

Originally by: Rhadia
It's what the entire game is based on.

yes, for this reason you can blob and gank at will almost everything what flies, assumed you have the power... except for cloakers

Originally by: Rhadia

0.0 Having deep pockets far from any enemy is not a problem particularly with the PVP of the game

what does that mean?

Originally by: Rhadia

As far as current mechanics go, using a very simple set of tactics, CovOps ships/cloakies have found way to become essentially invulnerable with very little risk to themselves.
so, if cloakers would be probable, people would jump right on them even while they're afk. Whats fair on that? Eve isnt fair. Learn that finally. People blob other people who hasnt a slightest chance against a blob of multiple size... or even onto a single ship. Nothing new about unfairness in eve, so stop using this word for argumenting any game mechanic.

Originally by: Rhadia

That's why I'm arguing here to solve the one thing that makes them play unfairly, which is the unlimited nature of their cloak.

eve is unfair, its played unfair all the time. The sooner you get that the better it will be for you.

Originally by: Rhadia

In the end all I want to see is equal effort on both ends to both attack, or defend.

blobbing a single cloaker?? Are you kidding? Exactly that is going to happen when cloakers will be detectable in some way.

Originally by: Rhadia

-sigh- Lemme say it again: They do accomplish things while AFK. Derp. We've said this repeatedly.

half eve is working afk. So what?

Originally by: Rhadia

Going afk forces anyone serious about defending to either:
A. Let them through the gate- Let them attack a player when you're unprepared to assist.
B. Remain 100% active and ready to try to catch them, defend your friends while they're not even at the computer.

yes, its fine as it is. Learn how to defeat a ****ing single cloaker. You've chosen to go to 0.0, your problem, learn how its played.

Originally by: Rhadia

Risk vs Reward? The reward is absolutely forcing your enemy to adhere to rules you impose upon them when there is absolutely no risk to them in exchange.

the risk is there in coming to your sov area, the risk is every single time the cloaker decloaks

Cloak is not broken, afk cloaking is not broken, its the only tool which allows psy warfare on larger mass of people, which is all absolutely fine.

Big alliances blob everything which enters there and is not cloaky/quickly enough, so they have to live with cloakers in their systems for that, in my opinion it is very, very balanced. Look at the whole picture.

Etrias Jhozah
Adhocracy Incorporated
Posted - 2010.09.15 23:59:00 - [398]
 

Originally by: Rhadia
Believe me, I absolutely understand why the majority of cloaky/griefer/bomber pilots are so active in these forums. It's become apparent that there is so little danger... so little excitement in piloting these ships that the only satisfaction to be gained is their KB stats and the tears they have desperately tried to harvest right here on these forums. Forums they're probably browsing while they sit cloaked in a system, no less, but that's probably simple speculation on my part.


Seriously, can you pack more whine into that paragraph?

Originally by: Rhadia
Nice flame bait, Etrias, but unfortunately you're absolutely wrong. I've never been threatened by a cloaky in system personally, nor have I ever lost even 1 isk because of their efforts. On the contrary, it HAS, however, always been my duty to defend against them with my comrades. As such it's become apparent how effortless it is for bomber pilots to play their risk-free PVP game while those of us serious about defense of space are left in the dust- either having to put forth far more effort into the defense than they do to initiate an attack, or simply letting them roam free effortlessly.


Far from trying to be flame bait, but if there's a new idea in this thread that you haven't already beaten to death, that's news to me. I get tired of seeing you and Allestin trot out the same arguments time and again that have been countered numerous times and yet, not good enough for you guys. Oh no, you go with persistence. Hell, some of the points you argue directly contradict themselves, and I particularly find funny the constant trotted out line "I have no problem with cloaking mechanics, just afk cloaking" and yet the complaint is when said cloaker actually DOES something is where your issues take root.

I find it hilarious that you declare that you want cloakers to no longer fly risk-free but any ideas from your camp would make 0.0 space even safer for the corps already inhabiting the space. Your complaint about a single cloaked ship being oh-so threatening to your corp and potentially putting a dent in your corpies shiny ships rings hollow. God forbid that you should have to fit a ship with a tank to withstand a single bomber volley or be on your guard when a known hostile is in system.

Always the bombers too, isn't it? Never mind that any changes I've seen bandied about would affect the whole class of cloaked ships, making the recon class much more disposable than should be. If you're going to complain about it, be honest where your issues lie. It's not afk anything. It's about getting ganked from a cloaked bomber, but that seems a bit of a tougher sell, doesn't it?

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 00:26:00 - [399]
 

Hadden, it's clear you did not understand or thoroughly read my post as every thing you responded with was contradicted or explained. The PVP of Eve, save perhaps waiting out reinforcement timers, is active. Not Afk, but a battle of both patience, skill, and teamwork on both sides of the battle.
Stealth bombers circumvent this in the case of AFK cloaking and circumvent certain essential rules of PVP that determine the equal-opportunity fighting terms presented to all players.
Truth is, Hadden, we have defeated you. Repeatedly. But the effort required in order to do so was far more than you seem to put forth in a week of your special sort of cloaky PVP, and is far from balanced.

Etrias. I'm sorry you feel that such desperate hatred towards us trying to make a fair battleground seems necessary.

If you find circular reasoning in these threads, it is only a mirror of your own, and those arguing against us- proving again, repeatedly, that the risk-vs-reward aspect should be notable to all players, and not just the carebears you hunt.

You are grasping at threads trying to paint me as someone who is here posting because he's butthurt over a loss, and it's the lowest form of argument. I will state again that the only thing here that I am trying to prove and argue to change is the ability for a CovOps cloaker to gain an advantage by cloaking for the unlimited amount of time he currently can. Who's to say ratters will be suddenly safe with a cloaker in system, simply because he can now be hunted? There's people who have flown ships in system for hours before without being caught WITHOUT a cloak simply because they actively escape attempts to be caught. Who's to say a cloaker would be totally useless from a small, simple change to an unlimited mechanic?

It is only you who are defending this mechanic who are dramatizing this to be the end of cloaking and all forms of PVP involved. No... It's not. It's the end to passive, effortless PVPing, making you play by the same rules as everyone else.

Sorry, I do understand why you might be angry, but it's a necessary change to ensure fair grounds of play for everyone, both attacking and defending.

If you want to know my personal opinion of the matter, it's always been my preference that Cloaks instead require a fuel source as their only limitation, making the danger of prolonged cloaked activity require a supply line back to a hub, or a a cloaky hauler (yes, bringing logistics into the equation as it should be) to supply the ships.

The fuel wouldn't have to be massive, or consumed quickly... Just at a manageable rate. Want to stay cloaked in a system forever? Do so, but be sure you have backup to keep your cover. That would be the only limitation, and the only danger added would be an increased need to move through systems- again, making the only real danger a cloaky faces still being as they pass through a gate (something they are designed to get through).

Stop your crying, and start listening.

Mark Hadden
Amarr
Endstati0n
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.09.16 00:39:00 - [400]
 

Edited by: Mark Hadden on 16/09/2010 00:39:40
Originally by: Rhadia
The PVP of Eve, save perhaps waiting out reinforcement timers, is active. Not Afk, but a battle of both patience, skill, and teamwork on both sides of the battle.

if you start argumenting with facts, you should include cloaky afk pvp also, which is as well a present fact as awaiting timers and teamwork.

Originally by: Rhadia

Stealth bombers circumvent this in the case of AFK cloaking and circumvent certain essential rules of PVP

the rules you like. Fact is, they "circumvent" them is because CCP has given us this form of warfare.


Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 00:50:00 - [401]
 

Originally by: Mark Hadden
if you start argumenting with facts, you should include cloaky afk pvp also, which is as well a present fact as awaiting timers and teamwork.


the rules you like. Fact is, they "circumvent" them is because CCP has given us this form of warfare.


CCP made a mistake. They do not, and can not forsee each and every way a specific mechanic will be used, or abused, after introduction. It's a fairly recent development to see AFK cloaking introduced as a viable form of PVP that has been refined now to the point that it is in essence totally risk free.

The risk vs reward motto of Eve is the basis of all mechanics of Eve, next to the balance between races and each class of ship. AFK Cloaking violates these base rules by totally ignoring the risks all ships were intended to have imposed upon them.

AFK cloaking may have been an (un)intended aspect of Eve, but it violates far more base, and important rules of gameplay that were defined long before cloaking, and long before the development of this tactic.

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.09.16 02:57:00 - [402]
 

Originally by: Rhadia

Way to jump the gun and go straight to personal attacks. You don't know me, and you never will- Lay off the martini-induced forum posting so replying to you might actually accomplish something.


Oh, I'm sorry you're right. The problem isn't with your balls, but with your brain. Lets see, you wrote....

Quote:
Sorry man, but there's always those few guys who look for the cheapest, most efficient way to win.


Gee let me think, I'm going to find the most expensive and least efficient way to get kills in this game. Granted its a viable play style I suppose but even Laser007 gave it up. Most of us, not a few, are going to always go for the cheapest and most efficient way to kill hostiles.

Quote:
While that is a powerful skillset to have, and fair enough, unfortunately it inevitably leads to the development, or discovery of a broken tactic. Broken meaning using a particular formula there is no longer any chance of defeat.


Cloaking ships die all the time. Is it easy, do they get away more often than not? Yeah, but so what. The only way to be nearly 100% is:

1. At a POS doing nothing.
2. In a station doing nothing.
3. At a safe spot doing nothing.

Notice the common thread? Doing nothing. As soon as you start to do something you are at risk. Now you are saying that one of the above should also entail risk. Because 0.0 shouldn't be riskless....but you want to get that free recon/SB kill without any risk. You don't want to fight him because you want to kill him while he is afk.

Quote:
It's the community, and the Dev team's job to decide in what situations a ship should truly be unbeatable, but in the case of a single, solo, cloaky ship they've got one small advantage that has made them able to completely circumvent every pvp danger of this game in one way or another.


Oh look a total lie. You can only circumvent the pvp danger by going to a safe and cloaking and doing nothing. Big deal. If they do anything else then they are at risk. Land near an object outside a station, pos, gate, etc. and you might very well be toast. Jump into a large roam on the other side of a gate with a couple of dictors....you have problems. The idea that a cloaking ship like a recon or SB carries no risk is just stupid. Even your buddy Allestin has a lossmail in a covops. How did that happen, why didn't he circumvent every PvP danger?

Quote:
Nobody arguing here, save a few unfortunately unintelligent folk, and the trolls, are trying to drastically change the way cloaks operate. We only want the same effort we put into defense to be equaled by the effort it takes for them to be a threat.


As has been pointed out again and again the only way to be almost totally safe with a cloaked ship is at a safe spot doing nothing. In that case they are not a threat.

Quote:
Yeah, funny how someone dies when they jump into a system with an 80+ roam on the gate. If you try entering around downtime, there's no risk. Same as if you use a newb alt to scout. The cloak then gives you perfect safety until you actually decide to play.


So much for the risk being negligible.

Etrias Jhozah
Adhocracy Incorporated
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:13:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Rhadia
Etrias. I'm sorry you feel that such desperate hatred towards us trying to make a fair battleground seems necessary.


Blah, blah, blah. I've engaged you before with reasoning which did no good. Obviously, you are trying to project some emotional attachment to me and my responses. Pathetic.

Originally by: Rhadia
If you find circular reasoning in these threads, it is only a mirror of your own, and those arguing against us- proving again, repeatedly, that the risk-vs-reward aspect should be notable to all players, and not just the carebears you hunt.


This is amusing on two levels. First, I really don't want to go through all the past pages in this and other threads where you and your ilk have said specifically "I don't have a problem with stealth bombers, just afk cloakers" and then the only reasoning used to justify crippling cloaking is attack based only. I really don't see any contradiction in my position.

Secondly, I know you like to prop yourself up as some sort of paragon of virtue stating that you only are doing this from a risk/reward basis for the good of the game. Lest you forget your words from an earlier thread:

Originally by: Rhadia
Don't play me for a fool. I am a bomber pilot myself, and I have been since a month or so after started the game. I have been on the attacking, and defending ends of covert PVP and believe me when I understand the grievances of both sides.


Allow me to let you in on a secret...I don't really have a dog in this fight. I'm primarily a miner and the only time I step in my cloak is when I'm probing out wormholes. It would be in my own personal interest to have some cloak detector or some lame fuel requirement so I can go about my business in peace. I'm arguing that the cloak mechanic is fine the way it is because I actually believe it's better for the game.

Originally by: Rhadia
There's people who have flown ships in system for hours before without being caught WITHOUT a cloak simply because they actively escape attempts to be caught. Who's to say a cloaker would be totally useless from a small, simple change to an unlimited mechanic?


This is possibly the worst argument I've ever heard. And it really doesn't have a thing to do with this thread.

Originally by: Rhadia
It is only you who are defending this mechanic who are dramatizing this to be the end of cloaking and all forms of PVP involved. No... It's not. It's the end to passive, effortless PVPing, making you play by the same rules as everyone else.


Poor use of hyperbole as no one is making that your "fix" will end all PvP. Your grand idea is nothing but a pointless mechanism designed to do what exactly? Put stealth on a timer? Some lazy mechanism to justify more laziness by pilots threatened by a simple cloaked ship.

Originally by: Rhadia
Sorry, I do understand why you might be angry...


Projection again...I have no hurt feelings on this.

Originally by: Rhadia
Stop your crying, and start listening.


Hahaha! Oh man, relax will you. Rhadia, you're much like Don Quixote attacking the dragon on the hill, and here I am trying to get you to stop attacking the windmills. Your tired arguments have gotten nowhere, not even a hint of dev attention and much derision from all corners...and we're the ones not listening?

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:28:00 - [404]
 

Quote:
Stealth bombers circumvent this in the case of AFK cloaking and circumvent certain essential rules of PVP that determine the equal-opportunity fighting terms presented to all players.


What? Equal opportunity? Rules? I don't think we are playing the same game. In Eve everything is fair game so long as it doesn't violate the Eula, TOS or is a bug. If CCP made it possible for me to fire a missile into the docking bay that could find you and shoot you....I'd use it. Again and again and again.

This isn't about boxing or fighting within the Marquess of Queensberry rules. This is Eve and it is ruthless.

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:29:00 - [405]
 

Opening you post first with a personal attack- First step in proving how little of an argument you really have, and how little I should care that you've even responded. You're not much seeming smarter when you're sober (assuming you are) than when you've been enjoying your martinis.

Second, way to quote me, implying my sentence meant something entirely different, and the quoting directly afterwards me saying that the sentence meant exactly the opposite of what you interpreted.

Gotta quote the whole thing to get the correct context- Something you apparently didn't realize when reading:
Quote:
Sorry man, but there's always those few guys who look for the cheapest, most efficient way to win. While that is a powerful skillset to have, and fair enough, unfortunately it inevitably leads to the development, or discovery of a broken tactic. Broken meaning using a particular formula there is no longer any chance of defeat.


Using a particular formula, there is no longer any chance of defeat. No risk, unless the formula is broken.

Mark Hadden is my usual example because (yes, feel free to take it as a compliment if you want) he is the most efficient stealth bomber pilot I've seen so far, and uses afk cloaking to it's greatest degree.

AFK at a gate. Wait for the camp to get bored and leave then slip through. If enemy gets persistant, start using a scout (Mark Hadden has very expensive Purifiers). Scout checks gate. If there's a camp? Go afk again (Scout is either a cloaky, fast enough to get away/reapproach, or is a cheap throwaway). Check again? If the camp is still there, repeat previous steps. Camp is gone. Slip through, set up in system. Wait in system for a while (afk, usually, unless scouting potential targets).

Ganking:
Find target->Observe target->Evaluate combat ability/how well his tank holds up to rats->Decloak->Lock->Overload all modules->Initiate attack->Align to celestial->Spam D-Scan/watch combat overview->Finish kill->Warp away->Cloak up->Go AFK->Repeat

If anyone does respond to the attack, Hadden not only knows far in advance if they're coming, but also is able to warp before they even manage to land. No stealth bomber pilot would attack anything fast enough to tackle them, not to mention (faction points aside, Hadden) that he is usually far outside point range, anyways. The instant tacklers arrive, they've not got a chance to tackle him anyways because he's got more than enough time to warp away.

This is just my experience with Hadden- We did eventually find a way to catch him, but it involved us having to devote 100% of our time waiting for him to initiate an attack, whether he was AFK or not.

He was, in essence, unable to be caught/killed unless we devoted such incredible amounts of time JUST to catch him.

Mark Hadden's defense, of course, is that Sov Space isn't ours and we shouldn't have the ability to defend it, and that we should just let him cull our weaker population at will. But what about those of us charged with the defense of them? No thanks.

Using his method of attack he has total control of the situation at all times- Sure, the ratting ship can attack him back- But usually the target's fate was decided by the time a lock was established, not to mention the time it then takes for drones to reach him.

Bait ships do not work unless your bomber pilot is inexperienced as to his attack plan.

Etc, etc, etc. Again, I'll repeat... Don't take me for a fool. I know both sides of this argument well enough, and circular logic won't suddenly make you right somehow.

A simple algorithm and one noob alt is enough to make a stealth bomber pilot invulnerable to all attempts to kill him.

Allestin Villimar
Zebra Corp
Posted - 2010.09.16 03:31:00 - [406]
 

Originally by: Xorv
- Double Sigh - Rolling Eyes

As has been said over and over and over again, all these "problems" you list are a result of you having super easy intel via Local Chat. Which is itself unbalanced.


Stop. Local and afk cloaking are two entirely separate issues, and having one does not justify the other.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion

Cloaking ships die all the time. Is it easy, do they get away more often than not? Yeah, but so what. The only way to be nearly 100% is:

1. At a POS doing nothing.
2. In a station doing nothing.
3. At a safe spot doing nothing.


POS and station people know where you are. You also can't probe or scan in a station, things you can do while at a safe spot. If you're gathering intel, then warping every couple of minutes isn't too difficult to do.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Oh look a total lie. You can only circumvent the pvp danger by going to a safe and cloaking and doing nothing. Big deal. If they do anything else then they are at risk. Land near an object outside a station, pos, gate, etc. and you might very well be toast. Jump into a large roam on the other side of a gate with a couple of dictors....you have problems. The idea that a cloaking ship like a recon or SB carries no risk is just stupid.


A cloaking ship played well doesn't. Are you warping to 10 km everywhere you go? If so, you deserve to run into things. Do you travel using any sort of intel channels? You probably won't jump into a roam if you do. Are you attacking players in fast-locking ships with warp jammers? Then you don't know how to use the ship.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Even your buddy Allestin has a lossmail in a covops. How did that happen, why didn't he circumvent every PvP danger?


I undocked about the same time my nephew yanked the power cord out of the wireless modem. 3 year olds are by far the most destructive force in the universe.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
As has been pointed out again and again the only way to be almost totally safe with a cloaked ship is at a safe spot doing nothing. In that case they are not a threat.


Remember that whole "Having an effect on the enemy with no risk to yourself" thing I've been going on about for a while?

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
So much for the risk being negligible.


So much for you not taking things out of context. He didn't scout, he wasn't operating near downtime, and he sure as hell wasn't watching any intel channels. Traveling in 0.0 is risky no matter what you're in. Aside from that, if 80ish people in interceptors and interdictors is what's needed to stop a single cheap ship from entering a system, that's entirely out of proportion.

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.09.16 04:50:00 - [407]
 

Rhadia,

It isn't a few of us, it is pretty much all of us. And it isn't something to be condemned or looked down upon it is the smartest way to play the game.

Also your sentence is contradictory, you say it is fair, then say it leads to discovery of a broken tactic...i.e. something not fair.

Really, you aren't nearly half as smart as you think you are.

Quote:
Using a particular formula, there is no longer any chance of defeat. No risk, unless the formula is broken.



Yeah, cloaking ships never get killed. Rolling Eyes These kinds of over-statements make you sound like a NUB.

Mark Hadden has also lost 10 purifiers on his battleclinic.com kill board on the front page alone. Kinda shoots your invincible argument completely out of the water. Yeah he is also good, probably because he's lost lots of purifiers--i.e. he has learned by doing and is now good. Not just in terms of skill points, but also he knows how to fly that ship well.

Quote:
Using his method of attack he has total control of the situation at all times....


You are wildly overstating your case, if this were true Mark Hadden would have no purifier losses, but he does. You know he had expensive fits because you look at his lossmails. You simply aren't being honest here. On one particularly bad day Hadden lost not 1 but 2 purifiers and a pod.

Quote:

But usually the target's fate was decided by the time a lock was established


May I suggest that you not use the word usually, or you go back to your statement preceding this one and change it. The two don't quite go together.

Quote:
A simple algorithm and one noob alt is enough to make a stealth bomber pilot invulnerable to all attempts to kill him.


Mark Hadden wants to have words with you over his purifier loss mail in the alley. Marquess of Queensberry rules will obviously not apply.

Allestin,

Quote:
POS and station people know where you are.


Irrelevant, the issue is 100% or close enough safety for pilots. Both the station and the POS provide that.

Quote:
You also can't probe or scan in a station, things you can do while at a safe spot.


Irrelevant cause said cloaking pilot is not afk which is your gripe.

Quote:
If you're gathering intel, then warping every couple of minutes isn't too difficult to do.


Again irrelevant for the same reason. What a tw@t you are, BTW. When somebody says, "cloaking ships are paper thin" you run to "oh I'm only complaining about afk cloaking" but when somebody says, POS, station you immediately run to activities for a non-afk cloaking ship. Make up your f**king mind or GTFO.

Quote:
A cloaking ship played well doesn't. Are you warping to 10 km everywhere you go? If so, you deserve to run into things. Do you travel using any sort of intel channels? You probably won't jump into a roam if you do. Are you attacking players in fast-locking ships with warp jammers? Then you don't know how to use the ship.


And yet guys like the invincible Mark Hadden and you die in cloaking ships.

[No offense Mark, you're an awesome pilot and I have loads of respect of Evoke, loved fighting you guys recently in Syndicate, you brought good fights.]

Quote:

I undocked about the same time my nephew yanked the power cord out of the wireless modem. 3 year olds are by far the most destructive force in the universe.


Yo Mark, does this explain all your loss mails too? I'm thinking not. I'm thinking sometimes you get the worm and sometimes the worm gets you.

Quote:
Remember that whole "Having an effect on the enemy with no risk to yourself" thing I've been going on about for a while?


You mean that part of you being a b**ch and swapping between afk and non-afk? Yeah i got that. I think psychological warfare is a valid tactic.

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 05:55:00 - [408]
 

Allow me to remind you that my emphasis was on the effort required to kill Mark Hadden (or any stealth bomber that knows his ****) and how much more it required on our part compared to his. To get any kills on Mark Hadden we are forced to remain active every moment, waiting. Constant effort in order to counteract, and destroy, a threat that doesn't even have to be at his keyboard to be safe from every threat in Eve.

Again, Mark Hadden's defense is that there shouldn't BE a way to turn the tables on a cloaker unless you've baited him, but I disagree.

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.09.16 06:45:00 - [409]
 

Quote:
Allow me to remind you that my emphasis was on the effort required to kill Mark Hadden (or any stealth bomber that knows his ****) and how much more it required on our part compared to his. To get any kills on Mark Hadden we are forced to remain active every moment, waiting.


One little itsy bitsy problem Rhadia, dear boy, in looking at Hadden's KB in closer detail it appears his most recent kills are not afk cloaking. He is in a group that consists of cloaking ships, interceptors and even the odd HAC or BC. He is not the epitome of the lone hard killer who spends long hours afk waiting for the kill. In fact, on a number of his kills he has done no damage at all.

It appears you've picked a bad example.

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 07:08:00 - [410]
 

Edited by: Rhadia on 16/09/2010 07:09:38
So because he does other things in Eve he's not the perfect example? You're not even making any sense.

I use him as an example because his tactics represent exactly the kind of care-free gameplay that makes him nearly invulnerable. He even posted a video of himself killing ratters that showed just how effortless it was. The only time he was remotely in danger was when he reduced to armor by some drones, but he only allowed himself to get taken that far because the ship he was destroying had already passed into structure.

I'm sure if we ask nicely he'll post it again, it was fairly well made at least.
I'll let you in on a secret: I'm part of the Northern Coalition (Oh noes!) so in the video you should realize those are my allies he's killing, for the most part, which is why I know of him.

You're really stretching to try and flame me, now.. Heh.

I'm sure next you'll circle back around to "oh, he only got easy kills because he was killing solo ratters, etc, etc, etc".

Maybe we should designate this a "Mark Hadden" thread, though I'm not sure I want to give him the satisfaction having a thread dedicated purely to him. Neutral

Xorv
Posted - 2010.09.16 08:32:00 - [411]
 

Originally by: Rhadia

If you want to know my personal opinion of the matter, it's always been my preference that Cloaks instead require a fuel source as their only limitation, making the danger of prolonged cloaked activity require a supply line back to a hub, or a a cloaky hauler (yes, bringing logistics into the equation as it should be) to supply the ships.



Not really, but since you gave it... Seems like you now want to make Cloaking be yet another activity in EVE that either requires an alt account or being part of a big zerg alliance. Of course if you add to that a means to detect cloaked ships, it won't matter as pretty much no one will use them anyway.

I must commend you though, for what you lack in wisdom, you seriously make up with persistence. Although, ultimately it's pointless, you won't convince anyone that doesn't already share your anti stealth pro zerg let us PvE in safety views, but please continue if it makes you feel better.

Originally by: Allestin Villimar
Originally by: Xorv
- Double Sigh - Rolling Eyes

As has been said over and over and over again, all these "problems" you list are a result of you having super easy intel via Local Chat. Which is itself unbalanced.


Stop. Local and afk cloaking are two entirely separate issues, and having one does not justify the other.


Pray tell how they're "entirely separate issues" when afk cloaking is a direct counter strategy to Local Chat Intel? I mean seriously that's a ridiculous statement.

PS. Hadden, having now read in this thread of your ill deeds upon the zergers up North you are now my EVE hero of the week!

PSS. Remove Local Chat!

Lemmy Kravitz
Minmatar
Rebirth.
Posted - 2010.09.16 09:18:00 - [412]
 

Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 16/09/2010 09:22:15
Don't touch the cloak just make a Destroyer only probe launcher with destroyer only probes that can scan down cloaked ships like you would scan down normal ships. cloaked ships will eventually show up like normal ships except for under shiptype and other vital information it will always say unknown. In busy systems it will be hard, just like normal combat probing, but with enough persistance if the dude is truely AFK cloaked in a safespot and you want to spend the time probing him down be my guest. AFK cloakers deserve to be podded for being AFK in a safespot anyways, just like anyone who is AFK in a safespot in hostile territory. And to those that scream my idea is a horrible idea, it would break cloaks. Try probing down a pilot who's at the computer jumping around different safe spots, it's near impossible. (unless the guy is a noob and uses only two spots, which will get him probed, tackled and podded with some effort.)

When you have a war going on in highsec with WT's in system, or if you're out in lowsec, or 0.0 let's see a show of hands of people who think it's actually a good idea to warp to a safe spot in a hostile system and just walk away from your computer for a couple of hours without out a cloak.

All other ways aside from this destroyer only probe idea of mine. Nerf the crap out of the cloak. I like the way the cloak works it works fine, don't touch it. well.. maybe make it so you can break lock by cloaking. but either way.

With a destroyer only probe launcher, the only people that get punished are morons that think it's safe 100% to go AFK out in space, in eve.

Lemmy Kravitz
Minmatar
Rebirth.
Posted - 2010.09.16 10:08:00 - [413]
 

I've Been saying the same thing for the past year over and over again and not once has anyone said squat about my idea. And I know why, cause it makes to much sense.

Mark Hadden
Amarr
Endstati0n
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.09.16 11:43:00 - [414]
 

Edited by: Mark Hadden on 16/09/2010 15:15:26
Originally by: Rhadia
AFK at a gate. Wait for the camp to get bored and leave then slip through. If enemy gets persistant, start using a scout (Mark Hadden has very expensive Purifiers). Scout checks gate. If there's a camp? Go afk again (Scout is either a cloaky, fast enough to get away/reapproach, or is a cheap throwaway). Check again? If the camp is still there, repeat previous steps. Camp is gone. Slip through, set up in system. Wait in system for a while (afk, usually, unless scouting potential targets).

lol, do I have any alternatives to afking and waiting till your 40-50 man gatecamp leaves?
Its a simple reaction to any gatecamp to sit it out and then pass.

Originally by: Rhadia

If anyone does respond to the attack, Hadden not only knows far in advance if they're coming, but also is able to warp before they even manage to land.

yes, I figured out how its working. Like any other pilot flying any other ship will be hard to catch if he knows whats he's doing. What you ask for is a nerf of an entire class of ships only because some people know how to use it properly to its full extent.

Originally by: Rhadia

He was, in essence, unable to be caught/killed unless we devoted such incredible amounts of time JUST to catch him.

just stop being that obsessive carebear and go roam or something.
I was in many regions of eve and yours was the most bitterly camped and blobbed, which gives me the satisfaction camp your systems.
I'm in an active campaign right now and dont have the time to sit in your systems, but once its over, I'll consider doing that again, this time eventually both your systems + a third cheap scout T1 frigate I'm skilling right now on one of my 5 accounts :-DD

Originally by: Rhadia

Using his method of attack he has total control of the situation at all times- Sure, the ratting ship can attack him back- But usually the target's fate was decided by the time a lock was established, not to mention the time it then takes for drones to reach him.

yes, it would be bad if you would control the situation. I know, its a desired vision to be in full control of your space and blobbing every single soul disturbing your ratting activities. But fortunately its not that way.

Allestin Villimar
Zebra Corp
Posted - 2010.09.16 15:11:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Irrelevant, the issue is 100% or close enough safety for pilots. Both the station and the POS provide that.


It's not irrelevant. That's information you're giving to the enemy that the cloaky ship is not. You also can't dock or warp to a pos in any old system as there isn't a friendly one in every system. You are just as safe in a cloaky ship in a safe spot as someone in a station is, only you can still probe out and gather intel, and it works in every system. That's a huge disparity.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Irrelevant cause said cloaking pilot is not afk which is your gripe.


You said nothing about them being afk in your previous post.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Again irrelevant for the same reason. What a tw@t you are, BTW. When somebody says, "cloaking ships are paper thin" you run to "oh I'm only complaining about afk cloaking" but when somebody says, POS, station you immediately run to activities for a non-afk cloaking ship. Make up your f**king mind or GTFO.


Cloaky ships are paper thin. They can also choose their fights to make sure that wafer thinness is never an issue. I think that's fairly well balanced. That's my stance on their combat abilities.

What I don't think is balanced is being able to head to a safe spot and not have to be defensive in any way, for as long as you want, while forcing every enemy there to be on their toes constantly and having no means of getting back at you. Psychological warfare is fine, but not without any risk.

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
And yet guys like the invincible Mark Hadden and you die in cloaking ships.


Everyone messes up sometimes. But I'm sure you'll find good stealth bombers generally have 95% or higher efficiency, which no one else is going to have if they do any sort of pvp outside of roams.

Torothanax
Posted - 2010.09.16 15:21:00 - [416]
 

Edited by: Torothanax on 16/09/2010 15:22:50
If you want to disrupt ratting/industry, bring a fleet that can handle the defenders, or bring a highly mobile roam fleet and don't stick around long enough to get caught. If you want unlimited intel gathering, plant a spy.

This crap with one person sticking a cloaked alt in a hostile system until a worth while target of oppertunity thier corp/alliance/whatever has the man power to gank is lame and unbalanced. It takes a lot of work to claim space. It should take the same or more to disrupt it.

No one should be able to safely afk in space. No ship should be completely invisible to all forms of detection.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2010.09.16 16:08:00 - [417]
 

Originally by: Torothanax

If you want to disrupt ratting/industry, bring a fleet that can handle the defenders, or bring a highly mobile roam fleet and don't stick around long enough to get caught. If you want unlimited intel gathering, plant a spy.

no. You're wrong. 0.0 space is too safe already.

Originally by: Torothanax

This crap with one person sticking a cloaked alt in a hostile system until a worth while target of oppertunity thier corp/alliance/whatever has the man power to gank is lame and unbalanced. It takes a lot of work to claim space. It should take the same or more to disrupt it.

no. btw. cloakers dont disrupt sov.

Originally by: Torothanax

No one should be able to safely afk in space. No ship should be completely invisible to all forms of detection.

of course, one should.

Rhadia
Posted - 2010.09.16 16:39:00 - [418]
 

Originally by: Mark Hadden
just stop being that obsessive carebear and go roam or something.
I was in many regions of eve and yours was the most bitterly camped and blobbed, which gives me the satisfaction camp your systems.
I'm in an active campaign right now and dont have the time to sit in your systems, but once its over, I'll consider doing that again, this time eventually both your systems + a third cheap scout T1 frigate I'm skilling right now on one of my 5 accounts :-DD


I love how you repeatedly pretend to know who I am. You'd need a lot more than 2 alts to camp even just my alliance Sov Space, and to be honest... if you keep fitting your bombers as ridiculously expensive as you do, I can't say I care if you do eventually figure out where I am.

Blatantly threatening some random forum alt isn't going to make your epeen look any bigger, so try to stick to the subject or go elsewhere. If you can't handle an argument without making threats, you need to revise your tactics, because it makes you look incapable of being civilized.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2010.09.16 16:55:00 - [419]
 

Nothing wrong with cloaks, but I'm loving this thread so far.

Carry on. Cool

Mark Hadden
Amarr
Endstati0n
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.09.16 17:21:00 - [420]
 

Originally by: Rhadia

I love how you repeatedly pretend to know who I am. You'd need a lot more than 2 alts to camp even just my alliance Sov Space, and to be honest...8

BCA - Black Core Alliance
Main system 85-B with a station, a neighbour system YZ- is carebeared and upgrade also. You only have those 2 ****ty systems and whine about cloaks because you rent only those 2.

Why I know this? Because what you describe, applies to their behavior very exactly, no one other alliance/place.


Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 : last (15)

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