open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Enemy Stealth Bombers in a mining system. A becomming curse.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 : last (13)

Author Topic

Octarius Eskravu
Posted - 2010.10.01 22:20:00 - [271]
 

Originally by: Barakkus
Make cloaks take cap to run, make it so that to keep up with the cloak for more than 10 minutes of cloaking requires a really stupid fit.


This, i have thought of this idea before, and it make ALL sense, a cloak should need cap to function...it will be the end of afk cloakers!

Sig Sour
Posted - 2010.10.01 22:32:00 - [272]
 

Stations and POS's should boot people out 300k if they are not active for 10 minutes.

Mal Lokrano
Gallente
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.10.01 23:55:00 - [273]
 

The more I read these "nerf afk cloaking" threads, the more I envision if there had been forums (and of course the internet) in WW2 the British would have spammed: nerf uboats all over them.

I mean afterall Stealth Bombers are the U-boats of Eve.

Octarius Eskravu
Posted - 2010.10.02 00:52:00 - [274]
 

i love how u guys keep comparing stuff in eve with real life...er...well i can asure you if i were piloting a u-boat i wouldn't be afk lol, and even back there they had a way of detecting subs, but thats in real life...eve its a all diferent story, u cant even evemail a coordinate of a safe spot to someone, he has to go pick it up in person that little whatever that is called a bookmark haha

but back to the OP, like someone here said, hire or get one of your dozens of alts to sit there in a sniper ship...end of story...i know it doesnt work if you like the afk bomber, also mine afk, haha...

Ehgrimm
Posted - 2010.10.02 01:19:00 - [275]
 

AFK cloakers can be found and summarily popped, slim chance (accidental bump is more likely) but still a chance.
AFK cloakers cannot shoot anyone, because there is no on at the computer, therefore they pose no threat.

What is this thread really about?

Lost Greybeard
Gallente
Posted - 2010.10.02 01:20:00 - [276]
 

Originally by: Octarius Eskravu
i love how u guys keep comparing stuff in eve with real life...er...well i can asure you if i were piloting a u-boat i wouldn't be afk lol, and even back there they had a way of detecting subs, but thats in real life...eve its a all diferent story, u cant even evemail a coordinate of a safe spot to someone, he has to go pick it up in person that little whatever that is called a bookmark haha

but back to the OP, like someone here said, hire or get one of your dozens of alts to sit there in a sniper ship...end of story...i know it doesnt work if you like the afk bomber, also mine afk, haha...


The original way to detect subs was to see them surfacing, i.e. "Uncloaking".

After subs had been used militarily for about 50 years, they came up with the ingenious "guess where it is and drop a depth charge close enough that it's forced to surface."

Subs were designed to get around SONAR and RADAR within about 5 minutes of SONAR and RADAR being invented. Those technologies give you a minute or two of warning at best, and you still have to know where to look first.

The Submarine's greatest weapon is to shut off all of its systems and have everyone go to sleep or sit still to minimize noise emission, at a great enough depth that RADAR does nothing, with passive sensors active, for long periods of time.

EVE is designed around the ideas of early naval warfare more than anything else, and the SB is very carefully designed to have similar behavior to a light sub (a u-boat, etc). If it was designed to act like an airborne Stealth Bomber from the modern era it would rely primarily on a speed greater than that achievable by any fighter above all else, and you'd die before your means of detection told you it was there... wouldn't be that fun a game.


Dietrich III
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.10.02 02:19:00 - [277]
 

Edited by: Dietrich III on 02/10/2010 02:22:46
Well the B-2 is a subsonic aircraft. It's not particularly fast. It does fly at very high altitudes and is extremely difficult to detect with Radar systems.

I still see your point. Just wanted to say that a "stealth" bomber does not necessarily need to be fast. It does need to be difficult to find.

And to the OP: Deal with the risks of being spied on and get protection for your mining force.

Man I hope that SB has a covert cyno and some black ops teams jump portal right to your Rorqual and blow it all up because you're not being escorted. THAT would be awesome.

Jodi Goulsti
No Salvation
War.Pigs.
Posted - 2010.10.02 03:03:00 - [278]
 

Originally by: Tau Cabalander
Edited by: Tau Cabalander on 01/10/2010 22:05:58

I don't worry about cloaked ships until they uncloak next to me. When that happens, I find this fit works well (don't forget the drones, or to overheat the hardeners):

[Hulk, GTFO]
Damage Control II
'Halcyon' Core Equalizer I

Invulnerability Field II
Viscoelastic EM Ward Salubrity I
Additional Thermal Barrier Emitter I
Invulnerability Field II

Modulated Strip Miner II, Arkonor Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Arkonor Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Arkonor Mining Crystal II

Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I


Vespa EC-600 x5


bump

Comstr
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.10.02 04:52:00 - [279]
 

Edited by: Comstr on 02/10/2010 04:53:58
Edited by: Comstr on 02/10/2010 04:53:50
All of you idiots saying "cloaked stealth bombers are just uboats" are ******ed.

Until you get nuc boats, submarines were more "submersible" not true submarines- they spent more time ON THE SURFACE and being forced to dive every time someone showed up in a light aircraft overhead. If they spent more than a few hours under surface their batteries would start running low.

Forcing cloaked ships to burn capacitor would be EXACTLY like a uboat or other pre-nuclear submarine. Sure there's nothing stopping the cloaked recon or bomber from going to a safe spot between planets every 20-30 minutes to gain the cap again, and if it cap recharges or boosters fitted it wouldn't need to do it for long, or even batteries to extend the time.

It's a ******ed game mechanic and the fix is unbelievable easy to make it both adding to gameplay for BOTH sides, only CCP would be ******ed enough not to do it.


Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go AFK in a Cloud Ring system that dotlan tells me has 1000 Rat kills a day. At no risk and no effort on my part.

Stitcher
Caldari
Posted - 2010.10.02 04:55:00 - [280]
 

HTFU or GTFO. If you can't deal with a couple of lone stealth bombers, you don't deserve to hold that space anyway.

Joe Bonanno
Posted - 2010.10.02 05:14:00 - [281]
 

The solution is simple. Mine with a few PvP ships and ignore local and treat your system like we WH-dwellers treat ours.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Posted - 2010.10.02 05:22:00 - [282]
 

Edited by: ShahFluffers on 02/10/2010 05:27:23

You know... this debate rages and rages and rages... all arguments have been made and everything that can be said has been said...

what'd be REALLY nice right about now is for someone at CCP to actually SAY SOMETHING to end this asinine debate once and for all.

Is AFK cloaking an intended mechanic or not? Do the DEVs see it as overpowered/legitimate or not? Are there thoughts about tinkering with cloaking devices or not?

Honestly, I understand that the DEVs prefer to hold back and listen to the community slug it out... coming out with ideas, counter-ideas, merits and de-merits, etc, etc, etc. But there comes a time when an issue has simply gone on for too long and requires a solid answer (as is the case with "ninja salvaging"). Someone say something... for the good of the forums, everyone's sanity, and in the name of turning our minds to more important issues.

Daool
Posted - 2010.10.02 05:44:00 - [283]
 

To my mind afk cloaking is an integral part of a SB's role - area denial.

I'd hate to see an ability to scan down a cloaked ship, but perhaps some ability to generally localise it within an area?

Perhaps with VERY high skills and a VERY expensive module on a VERY expensive ship you could determine the cloaked enemy ship is within say 20km radius of point X. You then have to trawl within that area to try and bump?

You could justify this by saying the module is detecting the faint electronic emmisions that even a shut down system will still produce. Hell, this in itself opens up the posibility of saying that to use the module no other ship can be within say 200km as this interferes with getting a location(?)

This opens up the choice of do you go searching ALONE for a SB in a very expensive ship who may (or not) be afk?Confused

Sandy Tavon
Posted - 2010.10.02 08:55:00 - [284]
 

Edited by: Sandy Tavon on 02/10/2010 08:57:25
Ok 10 pages of stupid ****.

Now the OP has mad alts mining. Now who would be mining in NPC sov space like that? - Ok so that means more than likely they have the system upgraded with the mining stuff.

Here is a fun fact, combat probes show on the directional scanner! - AND expanded launchers use 220 CPU! now what does this mean. If you see combat probes out GTFO. But wait, if it uses 220 CPU then the fit is seriously gimped. Use that to your advantage (instapop cane *****es).

If a lone bomber is a threat to a nullsec ratter then something is seriously wrong.

I just don't see what the whining is about.

kasiloth
Posted - 2010.10.02 09:05:00 - [285]
 

Originally by: Dietrich III
Edited by: Dietrich III on 02/10/2010 02:22:46

Man I hope that SB has a covert cyno and some black ops teams jump portal right to your Rorqual and blow it all up because you're not being escorted. THAT would be awesome.


That is for all of them who say " go mine there is no problem the sb is afk ". or for those who say " fit ur hulk with this or that to sustain the damage"

Nobody can be safe with any kind of ship, any kind of fit, either in solo mining or with support. A cloaked red in a system, staying there for hrs every day undetectable, is an unbitable war tactic -so far- and there must be a solution for that asap.

This is the main point of this thread.

flakeys
The Great cornholio's
Paper Tiger Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.02 09:31:00 - [286]
 

Originally by: kasiloth

Nice try man but im not a carebear.

I got a ten accounts mining fleet




This has GOT to be a troll .....


Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.10.02 09:33:00 - [287]
 

Originally by: Dred Control
If SB are now submarines, then give us the equivalent of sonar and depth charges to seek and destroy them, please.


And remove local so that stealth bombers can actually be stealthy.

Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.10.02 09:40:00 - [288]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Now liang , answer me , how many people will bother PvE`ing 0.0 with no local assuming rewards remain the same?


-Liang


Perhaps people would work in teams with more appropriately fit ships then. Or they could use their d-scan to check if it's safe. Shocked

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.10.02 09:49:00 - [289]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 02/10/2010 09:49:56
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: flummox
and the rest of you guys need to stop the Remove Local debate. it's been going on for years. and it's not even a solution for anything but your paranoia. the local channel is generated by the stargate that you use to jump in (kinda assuming this, but). if you want no local channel, then go to W-Space. as long as you are in a system that can have sovereignty, you'll have local.

DEAL !
But only if coming into any system without using a stargate makes me NOT show up in local.
Twisted Evil



Sure, but then you aren't linked to the in system traffic network communication system.

So you aren't seen in local but you can't see who is in local too.

Add a "switch" that allow you to be in local and at the same time see local if you have entered through unconventional means or keep you out of local (both ways) and I agree with you.

MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.10.02 12:29:00 - [290]
 

Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 02/10/2010 12:43:48
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
The attacker, in this case, has ALL THE CHOICES AND NONE OF THE RISKS. While the other side has to accomodate and prepare for WHATEVER CHOICE the cloaker makes.

In space the cloaker FORCES everyone to be in high alert while no one can force the cloaker to be in high alert. The cloaker CHOOSES who, when, where, how he attacks. And the attack is only made when the cloaker ticks his PVP flag on, not any second before. If the miner isn't ready tough luck. If the cloaker isn't ready... well then, hang on a minute or two, or three, or a day or two Wink. That's not balance. That's a PVP flag.




How is the attacker the one with all the options if the targets are too heavily defended?
The choice still lies with the attacker. Think about it. Who decides whether there will be PVP or not? Who consents to there being PVP? The defenders, even if they want PVP, have to wait for the attacker to uncloak and agree to PVP. The attacker, on the other hand, even if it's against his odds, can STILL choose to PVP.

Quote:
Im not going to attack anything if a drake is there, which means the drake controles the field, even if he doesnt know it. I can sit there AFK for as long as I like and not get a thing done while the targets get along with their lives and rake in the isk.
If you're both in space you still have the choice to attack the Drake if you wish and even if it's to your disadvantage, a choice that the Drake pilot doesn't have. And you point out the risk to both rather nicely. If a non-cloaking party gets distracted or doesn't pay attention they end up losing their ship and possibly their pod. If a cloakie gets distracted or doesn't pay attention, well, he loses on a kill. He loses an opportunity to kill Laughing! Not exactly balance, is it.

What I'm saying is that cloakies should have to WORK to stay alive in 0.0 as well. I don't care if it's jumping from safe to safe once in a while. That's better than how they have it now. How they have it now is akin to macro-play. They force players to stay alert and looking for them while they don't have to do **** at all. One side stays alert because their assets and pods are in the line if they don't. The other side, well, the worst that can happen besides them choosing (notice the word choose here again) the wrong target to mess with, is they lose on the opportunity of a kill.

Quote:
The only time sitting AFK in system works is when people like you panic, and thats all your own falt.
LaughingIt's not panic and you know this. It's staying alert and paying attention to your surroundings, something that the cloakers don't have to do. I love it how you go from "risk, stay alert, 0.0, you HAVE to in order to stay alive in 00!1!" to "you're just panicking". Note how cloakers dont have to be paying attention to the game to survive 0.0.

Nullsec should be dangerous to EVERYONE there. And anyone not paying attention should be able to face dire consequences. Cloakers should be able to be hunted. EVERYONE should be able to be hunted reasonably. There should be a module, with a crapload of disadvantages to the users including a system-wide broadcast like the cyno does, that is being used. That way, the cloakers that are in the ice cream shop AFK get killed while those that are hopping around get to stay alive. Make the module so that it is expensive to run, I don't care. At least it forces cloakers to stop going AFK or face some consequences. It's about time.


Scott Ryder
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.10.02 12:34:00 - [291]
 

Edited by: Scott Ryder on 02/10/2010 12:34:25
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Wah wah wah :'( Im not completely safe in my nulsec!



Fixed it for you m8 =)

Mr LaForge
Posted - 2010.10.02 12:39:00 - [292]
 

This makes me want to stop station trading and actually train for pvp. Just to shut a system down.

MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.10.02 12:47:00 - [293]
 

Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 02/10/2010 12:48:37
Originally by: Scott Ryder
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Wah wah wah :'( Im not completely safe in my nulsec!



Fixed it for you m8 =)

If you had read my post you'd have noticed it's about bringing risk, not taking it away. But as always, people like you try to distort the situation to distract CCP from bringing any kind of consequences to those that aren't paying attention.


Dr Ngo
Amarr
JESUS CHRIST IT'S A LION GET IN THE CAR
WE FORM VOLTRON
Posted - 2010.10.02 13:20:00 - [294]
 

Lots of tl;dr in this stupid thread.

If you want to afk mine go to empire. If you're a macro go diaf. If you somehow think that rallying enough protection to keep a paper thin bomber from killing you is 'too much work' to stay safe in 0.0 go back to wherever you came from.

I'd really like to see local in 0.0 (even lowsec) moved to a delayed system at the very least and removed in best case scenerio. Hell as many windows as I have open I'd still consider it an acceptable compromise if a delayed constellation chat was used as the 'new' local and in system chat was moved to the wormhole system. Of course the long range scanner should be fixed as well.

And while I'm dreaming I'd like a working sov system and destructible stations please.

baltec1
Posted - 2010.10.02 13:49:00 - [295]
 

Edited by: baltec1 on 02/10/2010 13:50:54
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
The choice still lies with the attacker. Think about it. Who decides whether there will be PVP or not? Who consents to there being PVP? The defenders, even if they want PVP, have to wait for the attacker to uncloak and agree to PVP. The attacker, on the other hand, even if it's against his odds, can STILL choose to PVP.


A garenteed suicide attack is not an option.

Quote:
If you're both in space you still have the choice to attack the Drake if you wish and even if it's to your disadvantage, a choice that the Drake pilot doesn't have. And you point out the risk to both rather nicely. If a non-cloaking party gets distracted or doesn't pay attention they end up losing their ship and possibly their pod. If a cloakie gets distracted or doesn't pay attention, well, he loses on a kill. He loses an opportunity to kill Laughing! Not exactly balance, is it.


A suicide attack is still not an option. They hold all the cards, I dont know if they are AFK or not (dear god, the afk argument works both ways! )

Quote:

What I'm saying is that cloakies should have to WORK to stay alive in 0.0 as well.


Try going solo in a bomber for a few months. You will find it is not as easy as you think. The only thing I have to defend me is the cloak, remove that and you reduce the bomber to once again being a useless ship.

Quote:
LaughingIt's not panic and you know this. It's staying alert and paying attention to your surroundings, something that the cloakers don't have to do. I love it how you go from "risk, stay alert, 0.0, you HAVE to in order to stay alive in 00!1!" to "you're just panicking". Note how cloakers dont have to be paying attention to the game to survive 0.0.




Yea because when attacking a target I dont bother to scan out the system to see what is there to come help you nore do I need to keep an eye on local spikes or have to manage collisions with asteroids/ships ect when warping into a belt or bubbles with cans on them and a cepter on standby at gates/stations. I also dont need to align myself to gtfo spots when things go wrong. And lets not get into that cloaked up pilgrim that was guarding the mining op or the raven that has a cloak fitted so it can warp off and hide in "perfect safety".

The irony of all this is you are wanting to rat/mine in perfect safety.

MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.10.02 14:35:00 - [296]
 

Originally by: baltec1
A garenteed suicide attack is not an option.
First, it is still an option, and one that the other pilot can't make. Second, if it's a smaller target or if it's more than one cloaker (which usually is) it isn't a "suicide". It's a guaranteed kill, and one PVP fight that only the cloaker dictates when it happens. You keep referring to "one lone cloaker" as if that was the only way to fly a cloaker.

Quote:
The irony of all this is you are wanting to rat/mine in perfect safety.
And you also keep saying this. And again:

I'M NOT ASKING TO MAKE MINERS/RATTERS SAFER. I'm asking that if you are in space and AFK that you face some consequences just as a ratter/miner would if he went AFK in space. It's supposed to be dangerous, remember? You keep dodging this with crap I haven't said at all. Why? Do you not agree that EVERYONE in 0.0 should face risk if not paying attention?

I repeat, I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST A CLOAKER STALKING PREY AS LONG AS HE'S PAYING ATTENTION AND ON THE PC. I only have a problem when he goes AFK while everyone else in space has to remain vigilant and the cloaker himself doesn't.

We need a module, perhaps a new ship, that once activated, is able to be seen by everyone in the system, it freezes the user so he's extremely vulnerable (just as a cynoer), it's expensive to run (maybe come up with another type of fuel), etc, and that is able to track down AFK cloakers. And that makes it hard to track non-AFK cloakers (the ones moving from safe to safe for example) but is able to catch those that are at school or in the mall.

I'm not asking for too much and you know it. I'm asking that CCP stop making it easy for those that are AFK playing with the added advantage of keeping everyone else on their toes.

Why are you against this idea?


baltec1
Posted - 2010.10.02 14:55:00 - [297]
 

Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2


Why are you against this idea?




Because I implant myself in target systems hours before an op so I do not run into bubbles. Because ratters used cloaks in systems with no pos or station to dock at. Because I am used to keep an eye on the enemy fleet for hours at a time. Because I need time to get into bombing position.

I can go on but as you can see nerfing the cloak will reduce one of my favorate ships to near uselessness for no reason at all other than to satify the lazy. There are countermeasures already, its just people like yourself refuse to use them and instead insist it is not fair.

MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.10.02 15:20:00 - [298]
 

Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2


Why are you against this idea?




Because I implant myself in target systems hours before an op so I do not run into bubbles.
That's fine. Implant yourself in the system. If you're planning to go AFK you can always log out, nothing impedes you from doing that. If you're going to be at the keyboard then you won't get caught. It's that simple.
Quote:
Because ratters used cloaks in systems with no pos or station to dock at.
My idea would affect ANY type of AFK cloaker only, whether it be a PVPer, missioner, ratter. If you're AFK and in space you CAN be caught. However, if you are at the keyboard you'll still have nothing to fear while you're cloaked. You can stalk, you can do your recon, you can do whatever, as long as you are at the keyboard. For example, as long as you change safes once in a while you'll still be OK. If you're not paying attention, then you die a horrible death as you should anyway in 00.
Quote:
Because I am used to keep an eye on the enemy fleet for hours at a time. Because I need time to get into bombing position.
Again, if you're at the keyboard you can continue doing these things. My idea would only affect those that are AFK. Getting into position shouldn't take you 2 days of AFK play Wink.

Quote:
I can go on but as you can see nerfing the cloak will reduce one of my favorate ships to near uselessness for no reason at all other than to satify the lazy. There are countermeasures already, its just people like yourself refuse to use them and instead insist it is not fair.
You haven't said ANYTHING that would affect a player that is at the keyboard other than having to change spots once in a while. And that is a very small price to pay for being invulnerable. In fact, if such a module was introduced you'd even know that you're about to be probed, since my idea includes the module being broadcast system-wide, just like when a cyno goes off. Everybody in system knows. If you're at the mall when the module is deployed, then don't you think you deserve to get popped? I think it's more than fair.

The only people that would be against this are the ones wanting to be able to stay in complete safety, go AFK while forcing everyone else to stay vigilant and on their toes.

My idea changes that in that EVERYONE stays vigilant. You can still do pscyhological warfare, you'll just need to pay attention while you do it Wink.


flummox
Posted - 2010.10.02 15:32:00 - [299]
 

0.0 is not about Danger. it is about Risk vs. Reward. just like the other areas of the map (and real life).

and i am starting to feel that some people just aren't getting it. let us go over some finer points... together!

Point #1:
There is no Game Mechanic that prevents anyone from doing anything in 0.0, such as mining, ratting, station spinning, hunting, gate-camping, PoS-ing, exploring, PleXing, griefing, touch-yourselfing, etc.

Point #2:
Risk vs. Reward is a term that applies to Game Mechanics. It does not include non-Game Mechanic Risk and/or Rewards; for instance: Tears. You may think that it does, but it does not.

Point #3:
In certain peoples' haste to call foul on cloaks and AFK Cloakers, they are trying to put non-Game Mechanics into the equation and have failed to include their own RKvsRW variables they hold so dear. In order to maintain a "lock-down" on your system (non-Game Mechanic), they must activate an account, pay for it, use RealWorld resources to do this (computer, 2nd client running, electricity, etc.,) train up the skills, truck out to your system (which has a whole new set of crap to do), and then spend the time "shutting you down". You cannot just ignore these things. And if you try and pass them off and remove them from the equation, then you must also remove your own made-up variables, such as "locking down a system"; a completely false presumption controlled by your own psychology, not a Game Mechanic.

Summarization:
Cloaking and using a cloak for game mechanics is balanced. It is NOT balanced for non-Game Mechanics. Which I believe to be of no concern to me, you, or CCP on any level what-so-ever.

i am certain that CCP is looking at this complaining and will probably do something about it (eventually). as long as they take into account ALL the topics presented here, there should be no issues.

let's take a quick pass over some of the heavier variables in the equation:

Cloaking
AFK Cloaking
Local Channel
0.0 Mining
0.0 AFK Mining
0.0 Ratting
[0.0 AFK Ratting??]
Cyno Fields, Covert Cyno Fields, and Hot Dropping
Safe Spots

as long as CCP takes into account ALL these items when balancing, there shouldn't be an issue. i would hate to see a cycle time or power consumption added into the game for cloaks but not see any equal changes done to the other items on the list.

currently, there is nothing wrong with cloaking as it is balanced with Game Mechanics and Risk vs Reward. it is not, and nor should it be, changed (a.k.a. "nerfed") for psychological aspects of a players' style of gaming, or falsely percieved effects such as "system lockdown".

it is just a little funny if you ask me. that the same Tool you use to keep an eye out for enemies (Local), is the exact same Tool they are using against you. it's almost perfect, isn't it? i would suggest that it is Balanced.

also, do you have any actual proof that the person is using a cloaking device? and not just safespotted up the wazoo? i'll take this one, chuck. the answer is: no! you have no proof, even if your alt posts and confirms a cloak is used, that this is going on.

none.

no proof.

wrong, sit down...

Theo Paphitis
Posted - 2010.10.02 15:36:00 - [300]
 

Dominion brought with it less risk for more reward as far as carebears are concerned. Prior to this you could catch stuff with 10 seconds of d-scanning belts after jumping into a system. Now with the new anomolies you need 30 secs for ship scanner and even probes aren't really much faster than that. Its a massive difference.

CCP needs to rebalance this and remove/delay local in 0.0

It works, WH corps do fine, if anything it forces better co-operation :MMO: and subsequently these changes will provide a small boost to solo/small gang pvp.

Rebalance the risk:reward, make 0.0 the dangerous and harsh place its supposed to be and encourage smaller scale pvp.

The only reason this hasn't already been done I bet is because CCP is scared of the 'bear backlash.


Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 : last (13)

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