open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Destroyer - Cloak Intel
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.30 13:51:00 - [61]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 13:51:16
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

I want the decloak FEATURE on dd's. I dont want to NERF afk-cloakers, even when it would be the consequence.

yeah, and I pointed out why its a bad idea, because of the nerf implied in it.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:16:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Ingvar Angst

You want to give destroyers this ability... in echange for what? There needs to be a counter of sorts, a balancing act. For example... remove most of the movement pentalies from being cloaked. Allow MWDs to operate while cloaked. Something to balance it. Instead, you want to simply nerf one thing tha tdoesn't need nerfing and get all the benefits yourself. It's as bad as those faux-pirates wanting to remove warp-to-zero so their gate camps will be more effective catching unarmed ships.


Wait a min...cloakers have no counter. If you are cloaked on a safe, nothing can touch you. Now the op proposes a counter for that. Whats wrong with it? The cloaker can see the dd on dscan, so he knows going afk is a risk. The cloaker can see the dd on grid, so he maneuvers accordingly before he gets uncloaked, warps off if necessary. Perfect balance, am i missing something?


Yeah, you're actually missing something quite major. A cloaked ship can't do a damned thing to you.

Lucien Visteen
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:26:00 - [63]
 

So for you a nerf to super carriers is a buff to everything else? A nerf to shields is a buff to dps, and a nerf to dps is a buff to shields?

And no I have nothing against gate camps its as mutch a valid tactic as gate blobs.

To Gember, yes I think a penalty to speed would be good. Or make the info you get on the overwiev bogus. I agree that it should not be able to find cloaks when its cloaked itself, but having it zip around at 500 m/s+ makes it a tad op in my opinion. There is a reason that submarine hunters dont travel at top speed when they want to find something, since it will be too mutch interference for the sonar.

Atleast I think this is the case, I'm not a marine expert, but to me it makes sence :)

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:37:00 - [64]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 14:42:46

Originally by: Lucien Visteen
So for you a nerf to super carriers is a buff to everything else?

depends on whats nerfed exactly, it will be a buff for something.

Originally by: Lucien Visteen
A nerf to shields is a buff to dps, and a nerf to dps is a buff to shields?

No, a nerf to shields is a buff for armors, since armor tanked ships will have massive advantages over shield tanked ones.
In the same time it would be a boost for armor penetrating ammo, since people shooting it wont face many shield anymore and hence do most likely full damage, for EM shooters that would be a nerf.
The question is quite easy actually, you should just ask who gains the most profits of game changes and who loose most.

Originally by: Lucien Visteen
There is a reason that submarine hunters dont travel at top speed when they want to find something, since it will be too mutch interference for the sonar.

RL analogies suck for scifi games, you know it.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:42:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

Wait a min...cloakers have no counter. If you are cloaked on a safe, nothing can touch you. Now the op proposes a counter for that. Whats wrong with it? The cloaker can see the dd on dscan, so he knows going afk is a risk. The cloaker can see the dd on grid, so he maneuvers accordingly before he gets uncloaked, warps off if necessary. Perfect balance, am i missing something?


Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Yeah, you're actually missing something quite major. A cloaked ship can't do a damned thing to you.


You mean a cov ops frigate and the bomber, cause all other warpable cloakies will tear a dd apart (well the falcon just warps off if it needs to)

or do you mean they cannot do a damned thing to remain cloaked? because that depends HOW it would be implemented, which ofc must be balanced accordingly.

Gemberslaafje
Vivicide
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:50:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Gemberslaafje on 30/08/2011 14:52:37
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

Wait a min...cloakers have no counter. If you are cloaked on a safe, nothing can touch you. Now the op proposes a counter for that. Whats wrong with it? The cloaker can see the dd on dscan, so he knows going afk is a risk. The cloaker can see the dd on grid, so he maneuvers accordingly before he gets uncloaked, warps off if necessary. Perfect balance, am i missing something?


Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Yeah, you're actually missing something quite major. A cloaked ship can't do a damned thing to you.


You mean a cov ops frigate and the bomber, cause all other warpable cloakies will tear a dd apart (well the falcon just warps off if it needs to)

or do you mean they cannot do a damned thing to remain cloaked? because that depends HOW it would be implemented, which ofc must be balanced accordingly.


He means that, in the current situation, while a cloaker is cloaked, the cloaker can't do anything. he will need to decloak to impact the game in any way. Which is a fair point, and one often used not to touch the current cloaking mechanics in any way.

Originally by: Lucien Visteen
To Gember, yes I think a penalty to speed would be good. Or make the info you get on the overwiev bogus.


That could be fun... the faster you go, the more delayed the info you get.. gets. So a 0.0 km/s destroyer would get exact and instant intel on how many km a cloaker is away, while a 100 km/s would get it, for example, once a second, and a 1000 km/s destroyer once every 10 seconds... needs to be balanced, obv, but I don't dislike the idea.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:57:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 30/08/2011 14:59:27
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

You mean a cov ops frigate and the bomber, cause all other warpable cloakies will tear a dd apart (well the falcon just warps off if it needs to)

or do you mean they cannot do a damned thing to remain cloaked? because that depends HOW it would be implemented, which ofc must be balanced accordingly.


What I mean is, while cloaked, a ship can't do anything to you. They're mostly harmless in and of themselves. They're not a threat... the threat comes solely in people's minds.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:57:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Gemberslaafje
You mean a cov ops frigate and the bomber, cause all other warpable cloakies will tear a dd apart (well the falcon just warps off if it needs to)

or do you mean they cannot do a damned thing to remain cloaked? because that depends HOW it would be implemented, which ofc must be balanced accordingly.


Originally by: Gemberslaafje
He means that, in the current situation, while a cloaker is cloaked, the cloaker can't do anything. he will need to decloak to impact the game in any way. Which is a fair point, and one often used not to touch the current cloaking mechanics in any way.


In my understanding a cloaked ship gathers intel, prepares an attack, and has the initiative on it. Which is half the victory in many cases.

What im trying to suggest, or you try to suggest i suppose, is a balanced approach to a new kind of warfare. And if it is done right, i am sure would be great fun.

Lucien Visteen
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:02:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera

No, a nerf to shields is a buff for armors, since armor tanked ships will have massive advantages over shield tanked ones.
In the same time it would be a boost for armor penetrating ammo, since people shooting it wont face many shield anymore and hence do most likely full damage, for EM shooters that would be a nerf.


Would it not too depend on the actual nerf. It might be that none of those are affected at all.

Originally by: Robert Caldera

The question is quite easy actually, you should just ask who gains the most profits of game changes and who loose most.


So then, how many will be affected by this destroyer?

And true rl analogies suck indeed, lets go with this then. The crew of your ship cant handle the data that comes in at faster speeds, its just too mutch too fast. So they need time to tell whats what.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:07:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
What I mean is, while cloaked, a ship can't do anything to you. They're mostly harmless in and of themselves. They're not a threat... the threat comes solely in people's minds.


Well i dont know if you have lived in a wh yet, cause our main tool are cloakies, both for intel and attack. We spy for minutes/hours, gathering intel, choosing the right tactic and moment, and attack. Cloakies are mighty, mighty ships. I love them, and ofc they would be nerfed by the new dd feature, but i would love the new tactical situation which that would generate even more.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:11:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Lucien Visteen

So then, how many will be affected by this destroyer?



All of null sec and wormholes for one.

You're breaking cloaking devices. They're meant to function as a means to not be seen at the cost of being able to do very very little while cloaked. They put a check on the unlimited free intel local provides (see: AFK cloakers) and allow a means of truly covert intel gathering (covops vessels). They allow black OPs ships to slip behind enemy lines unseen to create tactical advantages. If you create a means to see cloaked vessels you're striking at the very heart of the device well beyond your personal war on afk cloaking. Suddenly that Black Ops who's been planning an assault behind enemy lines for a week or two is exposed through no fault of his own. Sunndly that buzzard investigating a static wormhole is discovered when he never should have been.

The negative effects are wide-reaching, from small ships exploring to fleet ops in null.

Velicitia
Gallente
Open Designs
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:16:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Lucien Visteen

So then, how many will be affected by this destroyer?



All of null sec and wormholes for one.

You're breaking cloaking devices. They're meant to function as a means to not be seen at the cost of being able to do very very little while cloaked. They put a check on the unlimited free intel local provides (see: AFK cloakers) and allow a means of truly covert intel gathering (covops vessels). They allow black OPs ships to slip behind enemy lines unseen to create tactical advantages. If you create a means to see cloaked vessels you're striking at the very heart of the device well beyond your personal war on afk cloaking. Suddenly that Black Ops who's been planning an assault behind enemy lines for a week or two is exposed through no fault of his own. Sunndly that buzzard investigating a static wormhole is discovered when he never should have been.

The negative effects are wide-reaching, from small ships exploring to fleet ops in null.


suppose so... but if the dessie can only ping out to 40-80km (or whatever) ... there's still a hell of a lot of space to hide in.


Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:18:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Velicitia
suppose so... but if the dessie can only ping out to 40-80km (or whatever) ... there's still a hell of a lot of space to hide in.



exactly, it all depends on the balancing. dont make it too simple for the dd to even suspect a cloaked ship in system. it has to be decent and time demanding, for a good reward.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:21:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
What I mean is, while cloaked, a ship can't do anything to you. They're mostly harmless in and of themselves. They're not a threat... the threat comes solely in people's minds.


Well i dont know if you have lived in a wh yet, cause our main tool are cloakies, both for intel and attack. We spy for minutes/hours, gathering intel, choosing the right tactic and moment, and attack. Cloakies are mighty, mighty ships. I love them, and ofc they would be nerfed by the new dd feature, but i would love the new tactical situation which that would generate even more.


Wormholes are all I do. I click DScan every ten or so seconds out of habit, don't even notice I'm doing it until it fills up with a ton of rat kills because I kept clicking it on a run into high sec. Any change on dscan, even something swapping positions due to a slight distance change, is immediately noticed and processed. More often than not, I'm alinged. Alert. There's always a cloaked ship watching me waiting to attack, even when there isn't. I've been hunted by cloaked stealth bombers that blog about their experineces, and not lost ships to them (yet).

I'm also doing what I can to protect this way of life. The unknown adds so much to wormholes. You get complacent, you lose a ship and can blame no one but yourself. Hell, I lost a drake last week to a tengu and two other drake for that very reason... got complacent. Still kicking myself over that one... sigh... shouldn't run sites when tired.

So yeah, I know the power cloaked ships can have, and also realize most of the power is what their prey gives them. If you're alert you greatly minimize their threat. We don't need special ships scanning down cloaked vessels for us, we just need to use our brains and plan like they're already waiting for us.

It ain't broke. Don't fix it.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:24:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Velicitia
suppose so... but if the dessie can only ping out to 40-80km (or whatever) ... there's still a hell of a lot of space to hide in.



exactly, it all depends on the balancing. dont make it too simple for the dd to even suspect a cloaked ship in system. it has to be decent and time demanding, for a good reward.


The OP states they can see cloaked ships with probes. 15 seconds, you know they're their.

That's a broken mechanic right out of the gate.

Velicitia
Gallente
Open Designs
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:27:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Velicitia
suppose so... but if the dessie can only ping out to 40-80km (or whatever) ... there's still a hell of a lot of space to hide in.



exactly, it all depends on the balancing. dont make it too simple for the dd to even suspect a cloaked ship in system. it has to be decent and time demanding, for a good reward.


The OP states they can see cloaked ships with probes. 15 seconds, you know they're their.

That's a broken mechanic right out of the gate.


and then it was later fixed to some kind of gravimetric pulse thing (think sonar)...

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:28:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Wormholes are all I do. I click DScan every ten or so seconds out of habit, don't even notice I'm doing it until it fills up with a ton of rat kills because I kept clicking it on a run into high sec. Any change on dscan, even something swapping positions due to a slight distance change, is immediately noticed and processed. More often than not, I'm alinged. Alert. There's always a cloaked ship watching me waiting to attack, even when there isn't. I've been hunted by cloaked stealth bombers that blog about their experineces, and not lost ships to them (yet).

I'm also doing what I can to protect this way of life. The unknown adds so much to wormholes. You get complacent, you lose a ship and can blame no one but yourself. Hell, I lost a drake last week to a tengu and two other drake for that very reason... got complacent. Still kicking myself over that one... sigh... shouldn't run sites when tired.

So yeah, I know the power cloaked ships can have, and also realize most of the power is what their prey gives them. If you're alert you greatly minimize their threat. We don't need special ships scanning down cloaked vessels for us, we just need to use our brains and plan like they're already waiting for us.

It ain't broke. Don't fix it.


Well i think i even saw your ally out there once or more ;) Dscanning in empire cause of the habbit to do it fully automated is a fammiliar phenomenon to me ;) And you are right, if you are prepared enough you are safe. you dont need a dd for that.
my intention wasnt to fix something in the first place, but to support the idea of a ship with that specific role.
I can live without it, but it wouldnt hurt me, and no other cloakies if implemented right, plus adding a cool feature. Look at the noctis, it's a dedicated salvager. you didnt need it, but its handy.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:32:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Velicitia
suppose so... but if the dessie can only ping out to 40-80km (or whatever) ... there's still a hell of a lot of space to hide in.



exactly, it all depends on the balancing. dont make it too simple for the dd to even suspect a cloaked ship in system. it has to be decent and time demanding, for a good reward.


The OP states they can see cloaked ships with probes. 15 seconds, you know they're their.

That's a broken mechanic right out of the gate.


Well my bad, i didnt mention often enough that the HOW is completly open for me, but the idea for that specific role is good.

Lucien Visteen
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:33:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Lucien Visteen

So then, how many will be affected by this destroyer?



All of null sec and wormholes for one.

You're breaking cloaking devices. They're meant to function as a means to not be seen at the cost of being able to do very very little while cloaked. They put a check on the unlimited free intel local provides (see: AFK cloakers) and allow a means of truly covert intel gathering (covops vessels). They allow black OPs ships to slip behind enemy lines unseen to create tactical advantages. If you create a means to see cloaked vessels you're striking at the very heart of the device well beyond your personal war on afk cloaking. Suddenly that Black Ops who's been planning an assault behind enemy lines for a week or two is exposed through no fault of his own. Sunndly that buzzard investigating a static wormhole is discovered when he never should have been.

The negative effects are wide-reaching, from small ships exploring to fleet ops in null.


I dont see how the op's idea will affect all this. You can still gather intell from safe spots, hell you can even afk cloak from safespots (isn't that what cloakers do then they want to go "off the radar"?). You can still slip by enemy defenses and create tactical advantages, that buzzard that was investigating that static wh is still safe.

Anyone that is mobile, or in safespots is safe.

Lastly, and again read the ops first post. This is not a way to see them. Its a way, throu effort, to find them, if they are on grid and deciding that staying on grid for 23 hours is a good idea.

You might call it my war against afk cloaking if you want too YARRRR!!

A question to you aswell then. If you are fine with cloakers being able to stay safe while they are on grid with you, would you also be fine with invading fleets erecting a pos inside an enemy system and dock up inside that shield while they stay there?

(sorry for derailing op)

Alberio
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:35:00 - [80]
 

To be fair, I don't believe anyone should be safe in space in 0.0 or WHs. There should always be risk involved.

If you want to be perfectly safe, there are places for you: high sec, or a station. If you want to fly in 0.0, WH's, or even Low Sec, then you should always be prepared to be hunted down. I feel this should be true even for cloaked ships, and I say that as a Cov Ops pilot. Going AFK in nullsec should always be a bad idea, and something done with great caution and care (if you do it at all).

I like the prospect of the added mechanic of cloak-hunting destroyers. I also like the added risk it gives to cloaked ships. I don't feel it's really game breaking, since Corps would have a choice to make: do they deal with a cloaked ship in a destroyer, or do they get into better ships (but can't hunt down a cloaked ship)? Is that one destroyer pilot really useful as a cloak-hunter, or would he be better off flying his logistics ship...or his interdictor?

In summation, whining that this idea is a nerf is ridiculous. It does impact gameplay for afk cloaked players, but as some people have stated: I don't care about that impact. If you want to be a carebear, and not worry about people hunting you down: live in High Sec. All of that said, I, personally, feel that what'll actually happen is the following:

1) Destroyers start hunting down cloakers.
2) Smart cloakers begin setting traps and blowing up destroyers left and right in cloaked AFs, HACs, BCs, etc. etc. etc..
3) Things go back to more or less normal.

Still, the addition of the gameplay, and the additional role for an underutilized ship I feel outweighs any complaint about going afk in Nullsec (which nobody should do anyway).


Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:36:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 30/08/2011 15:38:54
Originally by: Lucien Visteen
A question to you aswell then. If you are fine with cloakers being able to stay safe while they are on grid with you, would you also be fine with invading fleets erecting a pos inside an enemy system and dock up inside that shield while they stay there? (sorry for derailing op)


This is a basic wormhole "liberation" strategy. Of course I'm fine with it.

And reflecting back... if it only can find them on grid... well, that's not so bad, however it's ultimately so useless as a "feature" that why bother implementing it at all? The role is reduced to trying to flush out someone watching a hole or a pos at range while cloaked, and if they're orbiting a few hundred km off, the destroyer's use is useless anyhow.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:54:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
And reflecting back... if it only can find them on grid... well, that's not so bad, however it's ultimately so useless as a "feature" that why bother implementing it at all? The role is reduced to trying to flush out someone watching a hole or a pos at range while cloaked, and if they're orbiting a few hundred km off, the destroyer's use is useless anyhow.


Well thats what we would have to find out, just as R&K's have done to the triage modul.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:57:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
And reflecting back... if it only can find them on grid... well, that's not so bad, however it's ultimately so useless as a "feature" that why bother implementing it at all? The role is reduced to trying to flush out someone watching a hole or a pos at range while cloaked, and if they're orbiting a few hundred km off, the destroyer's use is useless anyhow.


Well thats what we would have to find out, just as R&K's have done to the triage modul.


How long would it be before people complained that only being able to detect cloaked ships on grid was too weak so the range needs to be buffed to, for example, dscan range?

Don't tell me you don't see that coming.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 16:01:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
And reflecting back... if it only can find them on grid... well, that's not so bad, however it's ultimately so useless as a "feature" that why bother implementing it at all? The role is reduced to trying to flush out someone watching a hole or a pos at range while cloaked, and if they're orbiting a few hundred km off, the destroyer's use is useless anyhow.


Well thats what we would have to find out, just as R&K's have done to the triage modul.


How long would it be before people complained that only being able to detect cloaked ships on grid was too weak so the range needs to be buffed to, for example, dscan range?

Don't tell me you don't see that coming.


Well to be honest, i dont even see the change to the dd's coming...so ugh And even when it did, what are you trying to say, that it shouldnt be done cause some are whining about it to make it even more powerful? This same statement was made, as the discussion about the skill queue emerged. in the end ccp will decide what is good and bad, we can only make suggestions. and we are in the suggestions forum.

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.30 16:38:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: Barbara Nichole on 30/08/2011 17:03:42

Quote:
Destroyers can see Cloaked ships on overview.
Destroyers can see Cloaked ships on scan.
Destroyers can see Cloaked ships on probes.


no. I think we need to make destroyers special ability taking out super caps.... (sic)

It's not a good idea. First of all, it would destroy cloaking all together..as destroyers would then show up everywhere, gatecamps - worm hole entrances - every inch of known space.. and there is no reason to break the mechanic of cloaking just to give the ugly red headed step ship a new role.

Second, cloaking works as intended; the only thing needed is the removal of the cloaked from local to make cloaking truly stealth and to make nerfherders stop using the strawman of "AFK cloaking" as a leapfrog post to a cloaking nerf.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.30 16:56:00 - [86]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 17:09:44
Originally by: Alberio
To be fair, I don't believe anyone should be safe in space in 0.0 or WHs. There should always be risk involved.

If you want to be perfectly safe, there are places for you: high sec, or a station.

why then station as safe haven. Make stations and POS unsafe as well. Why do you draw the line exactly there?

Originally by: Alberio
If you want to fly in 0.0, WH's, or even Low Sec, then you should always be prepared to be hunted down. I feel this should be true even for cloaked ships, and I say that as a Cov Ops pilot. Going AFK in nullsec should always be a bad idea, and something done with great caution and care (if you do it at all).

this would render the 0.0 too secure, because you always could outblob every single intruder in the space you live in. This risk reduction is not acceptable at all.

Originally by: Alberio
I like the prospect of the added mechanic of cloak-hunting destroyers. I also like the added risk it gives to cloaked ships.

yes, thats not surprising from the perspective of a carebear living in zero.

Originally by: Alberio
I don't feel it's really game breaking, since Corps would have a choice to make: do they deal with a cloaked ship in a destroyer, or do they get into better ships (but can't hunt down a cloaked ship)?

or make a cloaker hunter alt.

Originally by: Alberio
In summation, whining that this idea is a nerf is ridiculous. It does impact gameplay for afk cloaked players

if is all a semi afk game. So I propose you not getting any SP afk or getting any industry or market job done if you're afk. Go mining for SP.

Originally by: Alberio
but as some people have stated: I don't care about that impact.

if you dont care, you should STFU and leave.

Originally by: Alberio
If you want to be a carebear, and not worry about people hunting you down

if you bother about afk cloaker, you should live in high sec.

Originally by: Alberio
Still, the addition of the gameplay, and the additional role for an underutilized ship I feel outweighs any complaint about going afk in Nullsec (which nobody should do anyway).

keeping the game balanced goes over adding new features to the game.
Afk cloakers are part of the risk in zero, which is too low already due to intels and local. No need for increasing 0.0 security by removing afk cloakers. Adapt or die.

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.30 17:16:00 - [87]
 

Cloak detection is a slippery slope into negating cloaking all together; as soon as something is offered to counter cloaking it will push cloaking out of existance.. making it extremely difficult to get intel or run blockades.. or explore WH space or do a number of other stealth tasks. The lore does not support your idea of using a destroyer.

I feel compelled to state once again that a cloak is not 100% fool proof. Cloaking already has quite a few limitations on it. You are never risk free as it stands now. I have lost cloaked ships in engagements.


Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 17:21:00 - [88]
 

Hmm... Barbara brings up a really good reason against this... cloaked haulers vs. gate camps. You have a bubbled camp in null, cloak may be the only thing keeping the hauler from being popped. (Not sure, haven't gate camped in null, anyone have experience with this?) It seems on the surface to me that a bubble set up 100KM off a gate pulling a cloaked hauler to it would be an instant death sentence if there was a means to pop the cloak with a destroyer.

Any input from anyone with experience flying cloaky haulers through null would be appreciated.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 17:37:00 - [89]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 30/08/2011 17:41:54
Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 30/08/2011 17:37:31
Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Hmm... Barbara brings up a really good reason against this... cloaked haulers vs. gate camps. You have a bubbled camp in null, cloak may be the only thing keeping the hauler from being popped. (Not sure, haven't gate camped in null, anyone have experience with this?) It seems on the surface to me that a bubble set up 100KM off a gate pulling a cloaked hauler to it would be an instant death sentence if there was a means to pop the cloak with a destroyer.

Any input from anyone with experience flying cloaky haulers through null would be appreciated.


If you as a cloaky hauler get dragged into a bubble, its almost certainly your death, because if the bubble is setup right, there is a fast tackler and decloaking drones, or containers already waiting for you. it wouldnt matter if there was a decloaking destroyer.

if you as a cloaky hauler come into a gatecamp (with bubble) as you jump through a gate, you have a slight to fairly good chance (depending on the presence of a fast tackler and your spawn position) to escape. even then a decloaking destroyer would not change the outcome, because the destroyer needs time to decloak a ship. (as i would intend it)

edit: with fast tackler i mean a ship which is fast, aproaching you and decloaks you before you can get away.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.30 17:55:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 17:57:27

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

If you as a cloaky hauler get dragged into a bubble, its almost certainly your death, because if the bubble is setup right, there is a fast tackler and decloaking drones, or containers already waiting for you. it wouldnt matter if there was a decloaking destroyer.


most gatecamps arent that dedicated, sometimes you arent decloaked by cans and wrecks even if you land in the bubble, so its plain wrong what you are stating there.
As camper you dont see if there is someone stopped 2200m away from a container and slowboating out of the bubbles. Anti-cloaker ship would ruin your last chance of getting away.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

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


 


The new forums are live

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

These forums are archived and read-only