open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Intel
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Rrama Ratamnim
Posted - 2011.08.15 18:54:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Rrama Ratamnim on 15/08/2011 18:54:39
I'd like to see a lot of new modules tied to soverignty...

1 - Sirens that are hackable that are anchored with enough security rating in system V required...
* Sirens are delayed based, giving attacking squads time to incapacitate them before they sound off, say 100k EHP with a 1 minute timer... if you manage to incapacitate it nothing happens except the global view will show that siren is incapacitated... sort of like how SBU timers are visible everywhere in system.. that way those people paying attention to whats going on can actually see that hey wait why did that siren just go down... somethings up...
* If timer expires such as a roaming gang ignores it and just goes straight on the offensive after the timer blows 1m for crappy siren 30 seconds for high level siren (perhaps a trade off of speed vs EHP 30 sec 50k ehp or 1min 100k ehp) ... If the timer expires and a neut/red has entered local a warning gets shot off in local or perhaps sort of like those windows that announce something special in a system, that says "Intruder Detected" of course this would only go off if the person entering was not blue to alliance, and of course there would be a cooldown between alarms so it would be going off every 5 seconds :P

2 - Ability to mass probe multiple systems but get extremely basic information, perhaps tied to a soverignty module that beacons the constalation for things... perhaps 1 type that would check for possible reds in the constillation, at low level giving only yes/no .. level 2 giving numbers, level 3 giving basic ship types and total # ... level 5 giving full ship types, location, amounts of each type etc...
* Waaaaaahhhh this is too powerful... yes it is but thats why you tie it to small, destroyable and HACKABLE modules that roaming gangs can take out or hack.... Hack it and guess what its giving eroneous data... say instead of alerting locals that theres 40 reds, tell them thers only 1 lone drake :) Incap the scan module, and guess what the level of scan information falls by 1 level... yes that means that you need multiple "scan reporters" in the const... and without those reporters online its useless, or extremely bad intel...

3 - DEAR GOD A WAY TO SCAN DOWN OR DECLOAK AFK CLOAKERS...
* I have nothing i repeat nothing wrong with the act of cloaky hunting in a system for idiot ratters... i have no problem with sitting in a system for an hour to annoy locals... I DO HAVE A PROBLEM, with AFK cloakers, that log in after DT and stay there for a f*cking week, periodically checking in to just drop supercaps or kill industrials, and the only recorse against AFK cloakers is to rat in teams... oh ya that works, thats not a counter to AFK cloakers, its a bandaid... especially when even if your with 4 buddies ratting an AFK cloaker that lights a cyno for 15 caps to jump in is still gonna **** you.
* Perhaps a very minute sig radius that unscanable for the first say hour, but that heats up over time so that say after an hour - 2 hours cloaked, its balooned to the size of a cruiser and is scanable, once on grid a new skill/module to Ping to find where the cloaky is on grid to try to decloak him perhaps make him glow ever so slightly when its on....
* Non AFK cloakers (not gone for more than 1 hour), can simply decloak for a minute hop safes and recloak while the sig radius baloon dies off.

4 - GIVE US BOOKMARKS IN SPACE!!!! Why the heck can i see very frigging thing except corpses and bookmarks on screen???? This is rediculous!

5 - Please god give us a way to atleast hide friendlys in local, i mean honestly this is just plain stupid, your forcing us to scroll up and down for what? just to making watching local annoying? You want more people per system, but i hate to tell you i specifically know 5 people that leave a system and go elsewhere simply as soon as local starts going over there screen size because its insanely annoying to have to keep scrolling up and down in local just to see changes

Rrama Ratamnim
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:00:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Andski
Edited by: Andski on 15/08/2011 18:34:49
The problem is that delayed local has its place in w-space, where this is counterbalanced by the fact that there are no static routes. Unlike wormholes, routes to 0.0 systems are completely static and we have supercapitals. Naturally, this provokes a few questions:

1) What would be set to delayed local? All 0.0 systems in EVE? Would a certain ihub upgrade be introduced to add instant local to a system? Would there be such a mechanic in NPC 0.0, with certain systems having instant local?

2) Naturally, nobody should be able to pass through a populated system with impunity. We also shouldn't have to man gates 23/7 - tedium is not a solution. Delayed local also eliminates a tactic where you park a cloaked ship in a system, keeping its residents aware of your constant presence, and hindering them from doing everyday tasks.

3) Merely setting local to delayed would introduce tedium when looking for targets - you want to find a target, but you're not sure if there are any in a given system, so dropping probes would become :effort: after a few runs. If I jump into a system, should I be seen in local immediately or when I lose my cloak? The 30 seconds would be enough to come up with a plan - if some ratter sees me in local and I pull it off right, I'd have a point on him before he has a chance to pull drones. My presence should not be completely undetectable by passive (non-tedious) means.



I like the idea of having a sov upgrade to get Instant Local (though it needs to be shown in the system status if you own the system and are in the system that it is a Local or Delayed intel system) .. though dont let agressers know if its Instant or Delayed :D

Also would make roaming gangs kinda funny especially if Instant locals sorta costly so you only really put it in systems you have to put it...

but if they do this they really need to fix things like Seeing whos outside stations before you undock....

I mean seriously stations have windows how the f*ck can't i see that thers a 500 man alpha fleet waiting for me to undock just because the system is set to delayed.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:07:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Feligast
Originally by: "My brosef Mag's"
Local is a hard mechanic to change. On one hand we should work harder for the information we want, but on the other we shouldn't have to click every 2 seconds to get it. There should be a balance and maybe 15 minutes is that balance.


Mag's.. I KNEW you'd be in this thread :P Definitely agree there needs to be a balance between dscan spamming and the delay, but my feeling is 15 minutes is just too long. In 15 minutes, a single BC could conceivably have moved 8-12 jumps away.. and even the longest solo fights don't last more than 5. In fact, 5 minutes is more what I would invision on a delayed local sort of implementation.
Hey buddy. Yea couldn't resist it. Laughing

I think you are right there bud, 15 minutes maybe too long a time. I was thinking more along the lines of longer term intel though.
For example, if you were actually watching the ins and outs of a system, you'd be at the gates scouting. You would then be in a position to gain instant intel with whatever you see. But if you were sat in space somewhere, without your friends providing that source of info, then the question is just how long should you wait to gain it?

It's that balance of just how much intel you get, how long you have to wait and what you do to get it, I was looking at.

This is for sure, a hard topic to balance. Let's face it, there will be many that will hate whatever comes out.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:21:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: Feligast
Originally by: "My brosef Mag's"
Local is a hard mechanic to change. On one hand we should work harder for the information we want, but on the other we shouldn't have to click every 2 seconds to get it. There should be a balance and maybe 15 minutes is that balance.


Mag's.. I KNEW you'd be in this thread :P Definitely agree there needs to be a balance between dscan spamming and the delay, but my feeling is 15 minutes is just too long. In 15 minutes, a single BC could conceivably have moved 8-12 jumps away.. and even the longest solo fights don't last more than 5. In fact, 5 minutes is more what I would invision on a delayed local sort of implementation.
Hey buddy. Yea couldn't resist it. Laughing

I think you are right there bud, 15 minutes maybe too long a time. I was thinking more along the lines of longer term intel though.
For example, if you were actually watching the ins and outs of a system, you'd be at the gates scouting. You would then be in a position to gain instant intel with whatever you see. But if you were sat in space somewhere, without your friends providing that source of info, then the question is just how long should you wait to gain it?

It's that balance of just how much intel you get, how long you have to wait and what you do to get it, I was looking at.

This is for sure, a hard topic to balance. Let's face it, there will be many that will hate whatever comes out.


No argument from me there, this is going to be one of those things where half the people are going to be ****ed no matter what happens. Just one where you're going to have to suck it up and get used to whatever they put in.

I see your argument, though. Getting the instant intel by having a gate scout is of course ideal, but that character isn't going to be able to do anything else.. ratting, shipping, whatever. Whereas if you're out doing things in system, you're going to have to wait.. or rely on buddies.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:49:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Feligast
No argument from me there, this is going to be one of those things where half the people are going to be ****ed no matter what happens. Just one where you're going to have to suck it up and get used to whatever they put in.

I see your argument, though. Getting the instant intel by having a gate scout is of course ideal, but that character isn't going to be able to do anything else.. ratting, shipping, whatever. Whereas if you're out doing things in system, you're going to have to wait.. or rely on buddies.
Yea that char would be taking an account and only producing intel. One could argue that it's as value, is on par with whatever space activity is taking place. But those are the choices that a new intel system could introduce.

Solo pilots will have to bite it and rely on delayed/older info, whereas organised gangs will be in a far better position.

Maybe the infrastructure the sov holder has, could be giving more intel to that group. But could it be that an enemy/neutral could 'hack' the communication device and either gather or tamper with the intel in some way?

mxzf
Minmatar
Shovel Bros
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:54:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Mag's
Maybe the infrastructure the sov holder has, could be giving more intel to that group. But could it be that an enemy/neutral could 'hack' the communication device and either gather or tamper with the intel in some way?


You should check out the second half of my post on the previous page, it outlines something like that.

Dwindlehop
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2011.08.15 20:10:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Dwindlehop on 15/08/2011 20:16:48
Edited by: Dwindlehop on 15/08/2011 20:14:47
Edited by: Dwindlehop on 15/08/2011 20:12:34
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Janos Saal
Edited by: Janos Saal on 15/08/2011 15:11:57
So we have (broadly) two kinds of intel gathering in eve right now. There's the up-to-the-second tactical scouts, who sit on gates and watch reds moving around, whether for fun, or to feed info to a fleet commander, and there's the time-insensitive "strategic" intel gathering - probing down and reporting the location and status of enemy assets such as pos towers, ihubs or whatever.
Both kinds of intel gathering are horribly inefficient and can be really mind-numbing for both the scouts and the FCs who may rely on their reports.

For the first kind (the scouts that watch gates and report movements to FCs in the field) it's inefficient and overhwelming. If you're an FC and you have three or four scouts all feeding you reports from different systems it can be a nightmare to keep track of that info while actually commanding your fleet.

If you're a scout who wants to go out and hunt down strategic assets the intel you gather is time-insensitive in that it won't often be acted upon immediately, and so the real task is recording and storing the intel for later use. You're thus confronted with the horrifying task of actually recording the info you've gathered. If you're lucky your might be in an alliance with a webform or something where you can click a few boxes. If you're unlucky you'll have to type up a text document with a list of all the modules and their status before mailing that to whoever asked for it (they'll never read it).

So those are the problems as I see them. How about solutions?
...
Basically stop making my life hell.




When we get round to addressing this, one of the first things I want to introduce is a common data format which all tools for intel work (dscanner, overview, scanner mods, probes, map etc etc) can at least export into. The end goal would of course be a proper intel gathering, management, collaboration and dissemination suite within the client, but the first stage I think is allowing player tools access to the raw data (not least because letting players thrash out their own tools is a very efficient way to discover what's actually needed, rather than what seems like it might be neat).

I approve of this philosophy. I would just like to add that there are some tools players cannot implement properly unless you give us the capability to mod the UI. If that is in the works, fantastic! If not, there are some real simple in-space indications we could use to make combat pilots' lives easier. I am thinking dirt simple UI enhancements, like (optionally) showing the location of off-grid fleet-mates exactly like celestials are shown. I would also like an in-space indication of gates with fleet-mates on the other side. Simple things like this are low hanging fruit in the fight for better intel tools. Please either give players the capability to write these tools or provide them early while you figure out what the best of breed capabilities needed are.

Edit for phone typos

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.15 20:19:00 - [38]
 

Removing local or making it very delayed is a double edged sword... It rewards the people spending time to gather intel, but on the other hand it promotes ganks and makes it difficult to engage other fleets on even terms.

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2011.08.15 20:21:00 - [39]
 

I really liked the idea presented up above which detailed anchored structures that report pilots within their range. An invading force can use intel to stay out of local (safe spots outside the range of these structures), or destroy/disable them outright.

How might this affect NPC nullsec? Would local always be empty, or would there be NPC structures in every system that could be temporarily disabled?

Perhaps these structures can be disabled with the hacking module, and remain disabled only as long as they are being hacked. However, they give no notice that they are being hacked - so you need to either have someone at that structure watching, or you need to be observant while you or your friends warp through space (do I appear in local when I warp around).

OMGWTFResearch
Posted - 2011.08.15 21:00:00 - [40]
 

Just remember that if Local is set to delayed. There needs to be an equal if not better way to detect someone who is in your system.

No two ways about it. The alternative is making Hisec better in the long term every time. And Nullsec becoming a pirate filled mess instead of the varied warzone it is today.

Yall have already said this tho so I think the various "remove local" expected posts in here are not very needed.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.16 02:01:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: OMGWTFResearch
Just remember that if Local is set to delayed. There needs to be an equal if not better way to detect someone who is in your system.
The whole point of removing local would be to replace it with something that is worse at detecting players in the system. The whole issue is that it already provides instant, free, and 100% accurate details about who's in the system — none of that should happen, and it most definitely should not be replaced with something better.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 08:21:00 - [42]
 

The problem is that if it is anything else it becomes absolutely trivial to gank ratters, which some people think is the end game of eve, but soon they just will go run lvl 4 missions in high sec.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:10:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Gypsio III on 16/08/2011 09:16:53
Originally by: Dwindlehop


- Cloaking will need to be balanced for this to work. Some way to detect the 'cloak signature' at the very least, and possibly limiting interaction with environment (like scanning, etc.) while cloaked.


You can't have a way of even detecting a "cloak signature", even if there's no way of decloaking or finding the cloaked ship. If you do, it not only takes us straight back to the AFK-cloaking-being-used-to-counter-bots problem, as people will refuse to PVE while they can detect any danger, such as from a ship cloaked in system. You just move the method of detection of a hostile from local to this new "cloak signature".

Worse than that, it would utterly break wormholes, the last home of proper Eve play. True cloaking - meaning that there is no way of detecting a cloaked ship in system - is essential for wormholes, as, just like in 0.0, no-one would run a site, do a PI run or even leave POS while they knew there were hostiles in system. Even if you limit the "cloak signature" detection to Sov 0.0, which would spare WHs, you just end up unchanged from the current state of botting and AFK cloaking.

Like or not, cloaking only works if you can't be detected - because otherwise, you aren't cloaked! If you don't like this, change the ability of ships fitting different meta cloaks to gather intel themselves, and fiddle with their fitting requirements and penalties. The fact that WH space has been such a great success, completely reinvigorating small-scale interactions and PVP, proves that there is absolutely nothing to fear from "true" cloaking.

Originally by: Furb Killer
The problem is that if it is anything else it becomes absolutely trivial to gank ratters, which some people think is the end game of eve, but soon they just will go run lvl 4 missions in high sec.


Non-consensual PVP is a cornerstone of Eve. If corps are unable to defend their members and systems, they deserve to be back in highsec. Clearing all the worthless carebears out of 0.0, and replacing them with well-rounded players capable of setting traps and fighting, will be a Good Thing.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:29:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 16/08/2011 09:33:12
Yet the non-consensual pvp should be limitted to completely one-sided ganks where one side doesnt have a chance in hell of surviving? It has nothing to do with carebears, it is simply that in eve a pve ship will never stand a chance in hell against a pvp ship (outside WHs). So either you got the intel to gtfo in time, or you dont and you die. Which means pve in 0.0 becomes completely pointless and people will just go to high sec, leaving only combat alts behind. That isnt exactly what I would call a well-rounded 0.0 player.

Funny also that you dont want non-consensual pvp against cloakers who are at least in pvp ships.


But please tell me, how can a corp defend their systems when people are running pve sites and no good intel? Sure you can have 5 pvp ships with the one running a pve site, or you can just run with 6 people lvl 4 missions and earn way more. And yes you can set a trap, lets have a trap up 23.5/7 just in case some ganker passes by and hope he goes for exactly the site which is the trap? Or do we need to have gates camped 23.5/7?

I am all for removal of local and replacing it by a different intel system that allows for LIMITTED hiding of ships in a system, but if not at the same time PVE sites and hotdrop mechanics are completely overhauled it is just a desperate cry for easy ganks with little to no risks.

Bilaz
Minmatar
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
Posted - 2011.08.16 10:55:00 - [45]
 

What we are speaking is not something new that have to be invented and forced upon players. Intel gathering is already here - from scouting before gang, intel channels to working with map and external tools.
Work of a scout is (extremly) hard for casual player as it is. corectly report actions of hostile fleet, its composition and location - all this in real time while making sure you wont be killed.
What i would i apreciate is making it easier - by making map more usable or exporting data to fc - where scout stands, where he thinks/knows hostiles are, interesting (like now you can see jumps in last 30 minutes - would be nice to separate group movements - say in last 15 minutes 90 people jumped in that direction) and last but not least being able to lend your scouting.

For instance lets imagine that concord pays for intel about (big/med) capsuleer gang movement in 0.0 and transmits such information via map 15 jumps in all directions from source (with 5 munute delay). Say gang sees on map something quite interesting - targets, contacts via map this independend scout and tasks to follow/track this group for them for reward. scout stops transmiting data to concord and staring givin it to this gang in real time (for some isk or free of charge).thanks to intel gang gets to their mark and kills it. then scout may folow them and get some isk from concord or someone else interested in killing these folks.
If you wont have to be in gang to suply intel - one can betray their own organization/gang (with no one but hostile fc knowing) and there wont be a way to warp on cloaked neutral (but cooperating) scout and kill it.
So basicly its intel map channels and one can transmit data into one or tune in (with perm. and password) - get paid for intel or pay for it.
and if one can sell/transmit direct scan/overview feed - there you have module, price, need to be uncloaked - and thus danger and all that jazz about being proffesional scout.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 10:56:00 - [46]
 

i like alot of the PS comparions for provide data and let people analyse it,

to combat AFK cloaking which is lazy and such like how about

either a ship module designed for say destroyers or fittable on a cap just about
the Quantum Interference Generator, requires fuel, acts like a cyno generator in that it imobilises the person using it has say a 10min cycle timer, while active no cloaking in system by anyone including your own side, so its not something everyone will use because sometimes you want cloaky hics/recons/bombers on your side, but a ship using a QIG shows up in overview like a cyno does,

option 2,
QIG module for pos's maximum 1 anchorable per system, expensive upgrade to use them, once per 6hrs may be fired to strip and block cloaking in system for 10-15min, a true scout at his keyboard can run and hide and evade that long, an afk cloaker not so much also have the timer on time to recloak persist if the ship logs off, so if you logski when the pulse goes off you still have 10min no cloak when you log back in to stop afk botting,

Miraqu
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:15:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
[

Like or not, cloaking only works if you can't be detected - because otherwise, you aren't cloaked! If you don't like this, change the ability of ships fitting different meta cloaks to gather intel themselves, and fiddle with their fitting requirements and penalties. The fact that WH space has been such a great success, completely reinvigorating small-scale interactions and PVP, proves that there is absolutely nothing to fear from "true" cloaking.



For me it should be like a submarine. As long as you do not know that its there, you cannot do anything. But as soon as the cloaker has "surfaced" for the first time you will know that there is a cloaked enemy.

But then you miss any game mechanics to hunt her/him. Thats the issue. If you managed to jump into the system without anyone spotting you nobody would know that you are there. Then you could gather intel unobserved. But if your are sloppy in jumping in or were decloaked, then the players should be able to hunt you. This would reward a cautious and skilled player but punish the sloppy ones.

Maybe there should be a variant of a T2 destroyer which would be able to attune his probes to your signature. If you never decloaked then the destroyer would have no signature and at best some rumors about the cloaky scout.

Then you would need skill to sneak up to an unsuspecting player, gank him, and then you would need equal skill in evading the hunters and getting out alive.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:17:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Furb Killer
Yet the non-consensual pvp should be limitted to completely one-sided ganks where one side doesnt have a chance in hell of surviving? It has nothing to do with carebears, it is simply that in eve a pve ship will never stand a chance in hell against a pvp ship (outside WHs).


How else can nonconsensual PVP be? And why is this bad? If people don't take responsibility for their own safety, they deserve to get punished.

But when they do take responsibility for protecting themselves, you can make the aggressor into the victim of nonconsensual PVP. As an example, last week I found a cruiser mining a gas cloud in a WH. As I tackled it, a Pilgrim and two Falcons uncloaked on me. Who was the victim of nonconsensual PVP there?

PanKrolik
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:28:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: PanKrolik on 16/08/2011 11:40:13
Originally by: Furb Killer
The problem is that if it is anything else it becomes absolutely trivial to gank ratters, which some people think is the end game of eve, but soon they just will go run lvl 4 missions in high sec.


This is actualy my main concern about any form of delayed local. The risk might far outweight reward to engage in most of traditional nullsec income earning activities. It might make it even almost completly impossible in many areas. Lets say we got a 30s local delay that means any competent player is in warp or landing on grid with belt rater/anom runer by the time he shows in local. 5m is more than enough to gank a rater scoop loot and be 2j away from site.
Players that live in low pop timezones for their alliance/corp will be compeltly screwed. Even login in outside of prime time to make isk could be too risky.
If somone is going to lose his ship every 2-3h he will either make isk in empire or quit.
You might compensate for it in rewards but then what about those living in complete backward space hiding behind dozens of systems with bubles curtains. They will make obscene amounts of ISK due to relative safety.

Now imagine that this crusier minig is living in odd tz or loged early because he is not going to work that day. Guy is completly f..ed to a point where their is no reason to login. You are pretty much enforcing any form of money making in null to be a group activity while profits dont even outweight potential risk.
Lets imagine a 3 gate system we put a scout on every gate. Two more ppl are on bodyguard duty. Then one guy is rating making 60m per h. 10m per hour per person ffs its not even a spare change. Then guy on gate 1 doesnt notice a SB that was visible for 2s before cloaking because he is f..in tired and bored from staring on that stupid gate for hours. Bomber lights a cyno... 500m carrier dead. 5 ppl die out of boredom for 50h before they can replace it.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:34:00 - [50]
 

a default delayed local would only work if it were possible to undelay it via upgrades, otherwise risk vs reward becomes far too skewed to risk, or the rewards as pointed out become ludicrous for a few rare systems

Shin Dari
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:58:00 - [51]
 

Edited by: Shin Dari on 16/08/2011 11:58:34
Remove local from null sec.

However to compensate add a probe alarm, and an Intel module for POS.

- The probe alarm will sound when the ship detects sensors sweeps from probes. The probe alarm shouldn't distinguish between friendly and hostile probes. Players should be able to turn this feature in on or off.

- The Intel module should be anchored outside of the POS bubble.


ps. AFK cloaking isn't a problem, PVE players just need to have some spine and be part of a defense fleet.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:02:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Shin Dari
Edited by: Shin Dari on 16/08/2011 11:58:34
Remove local from null sec.

However to compensate add a probe alarm, and an Intel module for POS.

- The probe alarm will sound when the ship detects sensors sweeps from probes. The probe alarm shouldn't distinguish between friendly and hostile probes. Players should be able to turn this feature in on or off.

- The Intel module should be anchored outside of the POS bubble.


ps. AFK cloaking isn't a problem, PVE players just need to have some spine and be part of a defense fleet.



ive been part of a defence fleet protecting people from cloakers (who turned out to be afk)
it was BORING! we just sat around waiting in case something happened in quick response range ( a jb or gate away at most) in our pvp ships, nothing happened for hours on end and we got bored out of skulls making no isk,

Miraqu
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:12:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Takashi Halamoto


ive been part of a defence fleet protecting people from cloakers (who turned out to be afk)
it was BORING! we just sat around waiting in case something happened in quick response range ( a jb or gate away at most) in our pvp ships, nothing happened for hours on end and we got bored out of skulls making no isk,


For ratters we just had mandatory fits and RR capabilities. When the bomber shows up you just warp to each other and repair. The problem is more with barges and haulers.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:29:00 - [54]
 

ooh another idea for intel and counters lets make cloaking and such more like sub warfare,

how about a destroyer only decloak smartbomb, no damage 50km radius any cloaked vessel in range is decloaked maybe not on a gate cloak but still, a decent fleet could then block recons from running rampant forcing recons and covops to actually sneak around the enemy (give them better tools for spotting camps etc) rather than just fly through with impunity,

though gate camps would still see diction null t3 breeze through laughing

as its alwyas bothered me that recons/bombers/covops evoke the submarine idea of sneaking around finding targets of oppertunity and exploiting weaknesses, but in reality it dosnt work like that and the only risk is getting lazy and stupid,

like the time i spent a day griefing in a rapier in a back system, i would warp in on the bs mining and pop his jetcan and changed my vector of approach when i noticed an extra in local, also did some shooting an unarmed pos, it was basically impossible to kill me as long as i didnt do something dumb, but what i could do was also limited,

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:49:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Furb Killer
Yet the non-consensual pvp should be limitted to completely one-sided ganks where one side doesnt have a chance in hell of surviving? It has nothing to do with carebears, it is simply that in eve a pve ship will never stand a chance in hell against a pvp ship (outside WHs).


How else can nonconsensual PVP be? And why is this bad? If people don't take responsibility for their own safety, they deserve to get punished.


That is already the case, if people dont warp out in time, they lose their ship, it is simply as that (sure you got sometimes traps, but really it is just to boring to sit in a cloaked pvp ship hoping someone will attack your bait). But I think it is a bad sign that someone like you, that I often think has good arguments, cannot see that you can have non-consensual pvp that is more than completely one-sided ganks.

Example of current 0.0 non-consensual pvp, I am doing a sanctum in a drake (or raven) in angel space, a cynabal (you know one of those ships that you need a blob for to kill if the pilot isnt an idiot) warps in and tackles me, best case scenario is that I survive 30 seconds before I explode, no one can even arrive in time to help me, unless there are a couple of cloaked pvp ships on grid, but that really isnt handy if you want to make ISK.

Same scenario, but now in WH (class 3) space (and how it also imo should be in regular 0.0). I am in a drake, and now we replace the cynabal with a tengu, since a cyna would be hilariously fast killed.
First of all, I dont have an enormous resist hole, so ganking me in 20 seconds is not very realistic. Aditionally I dont have to tank NPCs + attacker, since NPCs decide to try out the tank of the new arrival. Now we still got non-consensual pvp, but we dont have a completely one sided gank. The attacker still is the one who decides to go for it, and probably can disengage at will, so got enough advantages. But it doesnt include anymore knowing exactly the resist holes of your opponent and having 700+ dps to help you.

Now if you revamp the intel system by removing local, and replacing it by something more scanner like (active/passive abilities for scan, where active makes you a clear target but also gives you much more info, possibly with some limitted ability to detect cloaked ships), you can immediatly make it that single ships are much harder to detect than groups of ships, so if you come to gank me with 10 other ships I just warp out in time, but a single ship I wont be fast enough. Of course you can send one tackler first, but that tackler does need to survive against the npcs and it gives the defense gang time to help.

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.08.16 14:25:00 - [56]
 

Edited by: Razin on 16/08/2011 14:38:29
Originally by: Gypsio III
Edited by: Gypsio III on 16/08/2011 09:16:53
Originally by: Razin


- Cloaking will need to be balanced for this to work. Some way to detect the 'cloak signature' at the very least, and possibly limiting interaction with environment (like scanning, etc.) while cloaked.


You can't have a way of even detecting a "cloak signature", even if there's no way of decloaking or finding the cloaked ship. If you do, it not only takes us straight back to the AFK-cloaking-being-used-to-counter-bots problem, as people will refuse to PVE while they can detect any danger, such as from a ship cloaked in system. You just move the method of detection of a hostile from local to this new "cloak signature".

Worse than that, it would utterly break wormholes, the last home of proper Eve play. True cloaking - meaning that there is no way of detecting a cloaked ship in system - is essential for wormholes, as, just like in 0.0, no-one would run a site, do a PI run or even leave POS while they knew there were hostiles in system. Even if you limit the "cloak signature" detection to Sov 0.0, which would spare WHs, you just end up unchanged from the current state of botting and AFK cloaking.


I see no problem in the use of afk cloakers for the purpose of harassment. It requires a dedicated char, and it requires for that char to actually enter the system.

On the other hand, I do see that this may be a little too much return for being afk. The detection of a 'cloak signature' doesn't have to happen at the same kind of ranges that a ship's d-scanner is capable of. The detection range could be much shorter to force the cloaker to actually follow it's target to achieve any harassment.

This would require even more effort from the cloaker if cloaking is further adjusted to cause a reduction of the cloaked ship's d-scan range, for example.

Originally by: Gypsio III
Like or not, cloaking only works if you can't be detected - because otherwise, you aren't cloaked!

Thing is that cloaking is definitely detectable in 0.0 with the current local. Go figure...

Janos Saal
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:36:00 - [57]
 

It'd be really great if we could discuss intelligence gathering without it devolving into another pointless ****ing argument about cloaking. That horse is dead as a doornail.

Agente
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:48:00 - [58]
 

Scanner revamping
It fits several topics, but here I think is probably the best place.

It all starts making local delayed. But then we need a tool that can be used to have some advanced warning of incoming ships, without being tedious. So we have the EVEGIS system. It detects ships when Signature Radius/(distance*10)>1 (The numbers are an example. They need to be refined by somebody with a better idea of sr)

It has two working modes:

PASSIVE.
While on passive mode it detects some events.
Cloaked ship warping: sr x 5
Ship warping: sr x 10
Capital jumping in: sr x 50
Capital jumping out: sr x 100
Ship with active scan: sr x 50 everytime it “pings”
Cyno: infinitum
Gate activitation: sr so it can be detected at 5 AU

When any of this events is detected: alarm sound plus an icon on the HUD showing the direction of the source. The icon fades in 15 seconds.
It has an On/Off switch to avoid getting mad in congested areas.

ACTIVE
If you go ping you increase contact sr x 30
You disturb your passive scanner for 30 seconds.
You can activate it every 60 seconds. There is a switch for continuous pinging.
If contact at less than 30% of maximum range,you get a warpeable contact. Otherwise, HUD icon.
Due to the nuisances of Space-Time it only works on objects more than 1 AU away.

MeBiatch
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:55:00 - [59]
 

Edited by: MeBiatch on 16/08/2011 15:56:55
Originally by: Janos Saal
It'd be really great if we could discuss intelligence gathering without it devolving into another pointless ****ing argument about cloaking. That horse is dead as a doornail.


it would be nice if it did not do that... but that is what this is all about risk vrs reward and afk cloaking is zero risk... and complete reward... one of my mains is a mission alt in high sec and on that account i have a recon afk alt that i use to harass and disrupt annom peeps... i keep one of the sanctums from respawning every day... and it takes no effort what so ever from me...

This is a major design flaw in the game... In eve everything has its counter exept afk cloaking... if they are going to fix intel and make it more chalanging they they MUST nerf afk cloaking...

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.16 16:25:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Takashi Halamoto
to combat AFK cloaking which is lazy and such like how about

either a ship module designed for say destroyers or fittable on a cap just about
the Quantum Interference Generator, requires fuel, acts like a cyno generator in that it imobilises the person using it has say a 10min cycle timer, while active no cloaking in system by anyone including your own side, so its not something everyone will use because sometimes you want cloaky hics/recons/bombers on your side, but a ship using a QIG shows up in overview like a cyno does,
Far too (needlessly) powerful. Make it a standard module with a fairly long cycle time (say a minute or so) which simply detects cloaked ships on the same grid, and do not restrict the ship. It's short-range sonar that you can park beside your ratting/mining/exploration group to deter cloakers sneaking up on you, but at the same time, the long cycle between “pings” gives the brave cloaker a window of opportunity to get in closer and actually attack.
Originally by: MeBiatch
This is a major design flaw in the game... In eve everything has its counter exept afk cloaking.
That's because AFK cloaking is itself a counter to local. Creating a counter-counter is pointless and counterproductive. The proper response is to fix the thing that the counter is created for so you can adjust the counter to something more reasonable. In this case, fix local and AFK cloaking ceases to be a problem — nothing even needs to be adjusted.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

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