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

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 18:06:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
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.


i said "almost certainly" for a reason, also i mentioned that the destroyer as i would intend it, wouldnt make a difference.

but just keep shooting mr. adapt or die ;) im not sure what you would do if the change came...

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.30 18:09:00 - [92]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 18:10:26
even almost certainly is wrong if you consider the amount of bubbles(camps) in the zero. They would even rise (equipped with a cloaker hunter ofc) if gatecamping could catch cloakys effectively, thats certain.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.30 18:27:00 - [93]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 30/08/2011 18:30:03
Originally by: Robert Caldera
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 30/08/2011 18:10:26
even almost certainly is wrong if you consider the amount of bubbles(camps) in the zero. They would even rise (equipped with a cloaker hunter ofc) if gatecamping could catch cloakys effectively, thats certain.


your not listening, or i just dont understand you right (maybe because english isnt my native)

1. if you setup a bubble right (thats a mandatory for the following ok?) you test beforehand where you are falling out of the warp when the bubble catches you (if given also from different angles), and you drop fast tackler, drones, contis or all of them exactly there.
2. if a cloaky hauler gets catched by the bubble, there is a high chance for him to get decloaked. im not saying always, but the chance is quite high.
3. if he is decloaked he is dead, i think you agree here.
4. if he doesnt decloak, well lucky for him, cause even mentioned destroyer AS I WOULD IMPLEMENT it wouldnt find him before he warps away. the destroyer I WOULD IMPLEMENT, would only decloak ships with high time effort, not in a gatecamp situation, but in a recon situation.
i dont want a decloak button on that destroyer, i want it to be AT LEAST like scanning down signatures in a system, or in other words, to take minutes if not an hour (depending on skill and target movement).
so forget about gatecamps ok? gatecamps (with bubbles) are deadly enough for unaware or inexpierenced cloaky haulers.
honestly, if you warp to a gate before scanning it with dscan, and there is a bubble in line with you...you are screwed. or the campers are noobs.



Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.30 18:28:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
even almost certainly is wrong if you consider the amount of bubbles(camps) in the zero. They would even rise (equipped with a cloaker hunter ofc) if gatecamping could catch cloakys effectively, thats certain.


And if the destroyer described proved to be ineffective at catching cloakies, there would be outcries for them to be buffed. Just a little, right? To give them "a chance", right?

Definitely one horse best left in the barn the more I think on it. Besides, there are more fun things you could do with destroyers. Let them fit torpedoes, for example, for that ultimate in glass-cannon effect!

Alberio
Posted - 2011.08.30 21:06:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera

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


Really? You're seriously asking this?

Originally by: Robert Caldera

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.

I feel that we agree on one point: we both feel that nullsec should be dangerous. However, I feel that the main difference in our argument is this: I want nullsec to be dangerous to everybody. You want nullsec to be safe for cloaked pilots.

You seem to be under the impression that people don't outblob every intruder into the space they live in currently anyway, with the exception being cloaked vessels. In my experience, this is often the case (assuming people don't POS/Station up the second a neutral appears in local).

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

This is an ad hominem argument, and is poisoning the well. You have no idea who I am, or what I do, and your opinions on that are irrelevant to the argument. Furthermore, you have yet to provide a decent counter-argument against this proposal, or perhaps a way to make the proposal better which might suit everyone's needs. In fact, you just seem to be trying to turn this proposal into another "OMG GUISE STOP TRYING TO NURF CLOAKS" thread.

Quote:

or make a cloaker hunter alt.


This is a good point. On the other hand, it's not really any different than people making scanning alts to hunt down mission runners or print money exploring and running complexes. People make alts. That's the nature of this game.

Quote:

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.


I'm not 100% sure I understand what you're trying to say here, but I'll give it a shot:

I think you're saying that this is a semi-afk game, and because we get skill points while afk, industry and market jobs get can get done while afk, then you're proposing we remove those aspects of the game because you feel we want to "nerf afk cloakers".

This is a sweeping generalization. Or a straw man. Either way: getting skill points, researching, manufacturing are not at all the same thing as flying around in a space ship. This argument is invalid.

Quote:

if you dont care, you should STFU and leave.


Are you 12? Do your parents know you're here?

Quote:

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


No: if you want to be AFK in space, you should live in high sec.

Quote:

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.


This is a confusing statement: do you want 0.0 to be risky, or not?

IF: Intels (read: afk cloaked vessels) and Local make 0.0 low-risk, THEN: proposing a feature which may help mitigate that seems appropriate, no?

I want to decrease 0.0 security, for everybody. And that includes people in cloaked ships. I do not want to make cloaking devices useless, or get rid of them altogether. Make the skill tree take a year's worth of prereqs to do it, make the modules and probes cost 1 Bil each to fit, or any number of other ways CCP can devise to make it a rare/tricky/risky thing to scan down a cloaked ship, but there should always be some risk for everyone in 0.0 - including cloaked vessels.


Lord macattack
Posted - 2011.08.30 22:50:00 - [96]
 

alot about this here, but I think 1 thing should not be allowed for the destroyer. to see cloaked ships that just jumped through a gate. that is the dream of all gatecampers. know where the guy appear. Else than that. they idea is greatVery Happy

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.31 04:35:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Barbara Nichole on 31/08/2011 04:41:06
Quote:
However, I feel that the main difference in our argument is this: I want nullsec to be dangerous to everybody. You want nullsec to be safe for cloaked pilots.


hogwash!

Quote:
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.


this is totally beside the point, which is if you are cloaked and they know where you are after you jump into a gate camp they don't need a bubble; they just need to be in your way with drones or a fast ship.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 07:28:00 - [98]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 31/08/2011 07:29:31
Originally by: Barbara Nichole
this is totally beside the point, which is if you are cloaked and they know where you are after you jump into a gate camp they don't need a bubble; they just need to be in your way with drones or a fast ship.



and who said that they would know where you are? you are not listening either.
i guess people who posting right now, read the op's post and qoute me reagarding a completly different context.
i gladly repeat myself:
1. destroyer as a decloaker role, yes great idea
2. how it will be done: no idea, but it has to be time consuming
3. forget about it on gatecamps, wouldnt work. see 2.
4. please read the whole thread before qouting me out of context


Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 07:41:00 - [99]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 31/08/2011 07:46:12

Originally by: Alberio

Really? You're seriously asking this?

yes of course, why do you draw the line there? Why should you be safe in station but not in ship if you are eqipped with a device which should make you undetectable? I could say log off to be safe, why should one be safe while docked? I want a button to exect players from the station into space for shooty shooty... not good?

Explain me, how do you get to the conclusion erryone sitting in a ship should be in danger by other players, no matter how he's equipped. Why this principle? CCP gave us cloaks in their current form for a good reason, not because they didnt know any better or were too stupid to implement it in a way, detectable for other players, they made the cloak on purpose to what it is.


Originally by: Alberio

I feel that we agree on one point: we both feel that nullsec should be dangerous. However, I feel that the main difference in our argument is this: I want nullsec to be dangerous to everybody. You want nullsec to be safe for cloaked pilots.

cloakers are part of the risk. Exactly because you cant hunt them effectively, if they dont want to be hunted. Other wise every single ship, which is not cloaked is getting blobbed the **** out everywhere where big masses of hostile players are (deep sov zero). Cloakers are the last part of the risk which cant be eliminated by blob.


Originally by: Alberio
This is a good point. On the other hand, it's not really any different than people making scanning alts

just saying, they would be everywhere if they could help against cloaks somehow.

Originally by: Alberio
This is a sweeping generalization. Or a straw man. Either way: getting skill points, researching, manufacturing are not at all the same thing as flying around in a space ship. This argument is invalid.

is not invalid. I'm trying to make it clear for you the game is full of semiafk/afk aspects, because you *****ed about one of them (afk cloak).

Originally by: Alberio
This is a confusing statement: do you want 0.0 to be risky, or not?

ofc, read above... cloakers are the part of it. If you make them huntable, the last serious risk for deep 0.0 inhabitants vanish.

Originally by: Alberio
Make the skill tree take a year's worth of prereqs to do it, make the modules and probes cost 1 Bil each to fit, or any number of other ways CCP can devise to make it a rare/tricky/risky thing to scan down a cloaked ship, but there should always be some risk for everyone in 0.0 - including cloaked vessels.

the efforts of gaining something does not matter, if it gives you more security somehow, you can be sure there will be masses of it around. We dont need more security.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 07:50:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

1. destroyer as a decloaker role, yes great idea
2. how it will be done: no idea, but it has to be time consuming
3. forget about it on gatecamps, wouldnt work. see 2.
4. please read the whole thread before qouting me out of context


you shouldnt see the cloakers directly, it should be time consuming to find them, but only if they are on grid....

1) How do you know if they are on grid?
2) what kind of cloakers do you want to hunt? The most afk cloakers are off grid at safe spot.
3) how do you prefent people from using them for detecting cloakers in their sanctums? You should assume people will find a way to keep them alive, even in presence of rats.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 07:59:00 - [101]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 31/08/2011 08:00:44
Originally by: Robert Caldera
AFK Cloaking has to stay or else 0.0 becomes even more secure


Originally by: Robert Caldera
Cloaking as it is was intended exactly like this, and ccp never are going to touch it, because they saw it and said it was good, amen.


i dont believe it.

how exactly is 0.0 unsecure cause of afk cloakers?

where exactly cpp states that the cloak is like intended.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:05:00 - [102]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

1. destroyer as a decloaker role, yes great idea
2. how it will be done: no idea, but it has to be time consuming
3. forget about it on gatecamps, wouldnt work. see 2.
4. please read the whole thread before qouting me out of context


you shouldnt see the cloakers directly, it should be time consuming to find them, but only if they are on grid....

1) How do you know if they are on grid?
2) what kind of cloakers do you want to hunt? The most afk cloakers are off grid at safe spot.
3) how do you prefent people from using them for detecting cloakers in their sanctums? You should assume people will find a way to keep them alive, even in presence of rats.


1. you dont
2. the ones i want to find if they are there
3. how do you prevent people from using a mechanic? you dont, or you counter it (see your qoute adapt or die)

SpawnSupreme
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:11:00 - [103]
 

i would say a big fatNO but i have seen some ping ideas that would or could work provided it has a long timer.

destroyers have a role.... alpha strike vs t2 frig or budget salvager or suicide ganking or giving the 1 week old toon the edge to run some combat missions and sites where his norm frid not cut it.

i like to see tier 2 varient and if ccp concidered this role for destroyer class make it a t2 destroyer so only the few and the proud who train up destroyer V have the option to cause this annoyance and unease for the hidden toons on gate as if you cant ever warp too target than the cloaked person cant ever be found anyway if he at a safe spot.

so this idea has merrit it does not seem worth the effort to only find the near by AFKer.
i just say make a new destroyer class varent that cost more and sacrifice some dps for +1 mid +1 low and make only 4 wepon slots and double damage like merauders so players can utilize the 3 or 4 more slots for other random cool stuff

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:11:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

how exactly is 0.0 unsecure cause of afk cloakers?

for the same reason why you crying for a change.
As I wrote above, you cant remove them effectively by a blob of people, you cant hunt them, if they sit somewhere, you have to accept the risk instead of hunting the risk out of your area.

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

3. how do you prevent people from using a mechanic? you dont, or you counter it (see your qoute adapt or die)

yeah, so actually, they would be used for securing anomalies against cloaker, or afk cloaker who become active while you rat in a sanctum assuming they are afk. This is a security increase which is not acceptable at all.

Lucien Visteen
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:21:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Lord macattack
alot about this here, but I think 1 thing should not be allowed for the destroyer. to see cloaked ships that just jumped through a gate. that is the dream of all gatecampers. know where the guy appear. Else than that. they idea is greatVery Happy


It wont know right away where it is. It will know it is x km. somewhere from the ship, a good pilot might quickly figure out roughly where it is and a bad pilot might not. Ofcourse its so far only a rough idea, but yes, I like this one too.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:31:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera

for the same reason why you crying for a change.


i dont care about them, you already know that. i was just curious why you think afk cloaking is such a good tactic to kill someone. it isnt (the only one) and if i would have a afk cloaker in my sys, i would rat/mine/haul/whatever in a team, or fit my ship accordingly. so the mechanic is pretty useless anyway. but fair enough, i dont care about it anyway.

Originally by: Robert Caldera

As I wrote above, you cant remove them effectively by a blob of people, you cant hunt them, if they sit somewhere, you have to accept the risk instead of hunting the risk out of your area.


all you have to accept is that they see the same local as you, and probably have an eye on you. the rest you can counter. so again, i dont see that great advantage over this mechanic.

Originally by: Robert Caldera
yeah, so actually, they would be used for securing anomalies against cloaker, or afk cloaker who become active while you rat in a sanctum assuming they are afk. This is a security increase which is not acceptable at all.


this example alone would imply such an effort, that the reward wouldnt be worth it to many people, besides you can already counter afk cloaker, or secure you from them if you want to. you wouldnt need a destroyer for that.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:19:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
i dont care about them, you already know that. i was just curious why you think afk cloaking is such a good tactic to kill someone. it isnt (the only one) and if i would have a afk cloaker in my sys, i would rat/mine/haul/whatever in a team, or fit my ship accordingly. so the mechanic is pretty useless anyway. but fair enough, i dont care about it anyway.


Whoa! Dude! STOP RIGHT THERE!

OK, reread what you wrote. Look at the bolded part. OK, now reread it again. Absorb it. Embrace the words. Love the words.

You just proved afk cloaking isn't a problem.

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
...you wouldnt need a destroyer for that.


Exactly.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:21:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
i dont care about them, you already know that. i was just curious why you think afk cloaking is such a good tactic to kill someone. it isnt (the only one) and if i would have a afk cloaker in my sys, i would rat/mine/haul/whatever in a team, or fit my ship accordingly. so the mechanic is pretty useless anyway. but fair enough, i dont care about it anyway.


Whoa! Dude! STOP RIGHT THERE!

OK, reread what you wrote. Look at the bolded part. OK, now reread it again. Absorb it. Embrace the words. Love the words.

You just proved afk cloaking isn't a problem.

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
...you wouldnt need a destroyer for that.


Exactly.


never said it is a problem ;) i even repeatedly said i dont care about it at all. but thanks for reading and understanding my post!

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:22:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

all you have to accept is that they see the same local as you, and probably have an eye on you. the rest you can counter. so again, i dont see that great advantage over this mechanic.

you have to accept they are there.


Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

this example alone would imply such an effort, that the reward wouldnt be worth it to many people, besides you can already counter afk cloaker, or secure you from them if you want to. you wouldnt need a destroyer for that.

what?? I'm little confused.
You suggested a cloak hunter to fight afk cloaker... of what kind actually???
As you say there are already methods of fighting them, why do you want a dedicated ship for that? its not needed as you said!

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:42:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
what?? I'm little confused.
You suggested a cloak hunter to fight afk cloaker... of what kind actually???
As you say there are already methods of fighting them, why do you want a dedicated ship for that? its not needed as you said!


you know, sometimes i wished i could talk to someone in person, then this misunderstandings wouldnt appear. no...i didnt ever suggested i want a dedicated decloak ship introduced to fight afk cloaker. in fact, how many times now.. i dont know..., said i dont care about them AT ALL.

what i want is this:
-give the destroyer a dedicated role to decloak ships.
-balance it so that it wouldnt be good for gate camps, but a time consuming effort
-it works best when the cloaked ship is on grid (dont ask me how, some kind of minigame, but time consuming)
-this is optional: perhaps it works also in the whole system, but only with multiple destroyers involved and triangulation mechanics (even more time consuming)

again, im talking about ADDING something to gameplay, not nerfing something until to the point it is unuseable. i live in wh's. cloakers are my maintool. i dont want to shoot me in my own foot. all i want is that cat & mouse play which it could generate.

dont say it wouldnt work, dont say i fix something what aint broke. i dont want to fix, i want to add. and if it is added in the right way, it would be a win.

sure i know, afk cloaking wouldnt be possible anymore, WITHOUT risk. but thats perfectly fine for me. what is WITHOUT risk anyway in eve? what should be without any risk in 0.0?

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:48:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome


what i want is this:
-give the destroyer a dedicated role to decloak ships.
-balance it so that it wouldnt be good for gate camps, but a time consuming effort
-it works best when the cloaked ship is on grid (dont ask me how, some kind of minigame, but time consuming)
-this is optional: perhaps it works also in the whole system, but only with multiple destroyers involved and triangulation mechanics (even more time consuming)



If this works off-grid, it's for hunting afk cloakers, period. There's no other viable use for it whatsoever. If it doesn't work off-grid, it's worthless and not worth implementing in any way, shape or form simply because when someone realizes how worthless it is they'll start screaming for it to be buffed to work off grid so it has value. Value hunting afk cloakers. Or, just as bad, they'll argue it needs to be faster so it can catch cloaked ships at a gate.

So, since we've determined that you don't care about afk cloakers, ergo there's no need for it to function off-grid, we've pretty well established that, as you'd recommending it being implemented, it has no real value to add to the game except to serve as a base introduction of a new methodology that will scream for buffs in the future and ultimately break cloaking as a mechanic.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 12:58:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 31/08/2011 13:04:01
Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 31/08/2011 13:01:55
Originally by: Ingvar Angst

If this works off-grid, it's for hunting afk cloakers, period. There's no other viable use for it whatsoever. If it doesn't work off-grid, it's worthless and not worth implementing in any way, shape or form simply because when someone realizes how worthless it is they'll start screaming for it to be buffed to work off grid so it has value. Value hunting afk cloakers. Or, just as bad, they'll argue it needs to be faster so it can catch cloaked ships at a gate.

So, since we've determined that you don't care about afk cloakers, ergo there's no need for it to function off-grid, we've pretty well established that, as you'd recommending it being implemented, it has no real value to add to the game except to serve as a base introduction of a new methodology that will scream for buffs in the future and ultimately break cloaking as a mechanic.


if it works off grid, i can imagine plenty of intel gathering scenarios which it could generate. you suspect the red in local to be a cloaker? ok, what ship is he in? bring the destroyer and find out. what aprox. position does it have? (what is he doing) bring the destroyer and find out. to some of you that kind of intel may be meaningless, i for one would take this precious intel with kisshand for my descision making in a wormhole.

if it works on grid, and turns out to be useless, so be it. doesnt hurt anyone. look what become to the triage module if someone thinks about it. and triage didnt need a buff, nor was there a demand for it.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:04:00 - [113]
 

f*ck off already, we dont need a cloak nerf.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:06:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
f*ck off already, we dont need a cloak nerf.


oh do you get tired already? good.

Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
draketrain
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:16:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Alberio
Originally by: Robert Caldera
No: if you want to be AFK in space, you should live in high sec.


Actually that's you good sir.

Some people actually try to live in space few dozen jumps to closest station they can dock.

I suggest you try that first before *****ing.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:17:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 31/08/2011 13:18:21
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome

if it works off grid, i can imagine plenty of intel gathering scenarios which it could generate. you suspect the red in local to be a cloaker? ok, what ship is he in? bring the destroyer and find out. what aprox. position does it have? (what is he doing) bring the destroyer and find out. to some of you that kind of intel may be meaningless, i for one would take this precious intel with kisshand for my descision making in a wormhole.

if it works on grid, and turns out to be useless, so be it. doesnt hurt anyone. look what become to the triage module if someone thinks about it. and triage didnt need a buff, nor was there a demand for it.


Now why the hell do you want to nerf wormholes with excessive intel? There's already plenty of intel to be gathered but not so much as to mitigate the risk to that of null space. Wormholes are meant to be the "Surprize *********!" of Eve, the last frontier, the last holding of dangerous space... don't be killing the spirit of wormholes with your extra intel crap. Don't want it and definitely don't need it. I've had stealth bombers camp in my hole and still went about my business, it just had that added thrill suspecting that he was about to strike at any moment. He left, I never knew exactly when, and i like it that way. Man, if you need to nerf the danger in wormholes, you should go back to null where it's safe.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:22:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Ingvar Angst

Now why the hell do you want to nerf wormholes with excessive intel? There's already plenty of intel to be gathered but not so much as to mitigate the risk to that of null space. Wormholes are meant to be the "Surprize *********!" of Eve, the last frontier, the last holding of dangerous space... don't be killing the spirit of wormholes with your extra intel crap. Don't want it and definitely don't need it. I've had stealth bombers camp in my hole and still went about my business, it just had that added thrill suspecting that he was about to strike at any moment. He left, I never knew exactly when, and i like it that way. Man, if you need to nerf the danger in wormholes, you should go back to null where it's safe.


sigh, im totally with you. i dont want it to be a piece of cake. i just think it could be good when its done right. how about a mod which has to be activated that works like a cyno. destroyer cannot move, everybody in system knows someone is searching for a cloaker. sure it can has severe drawbacks.

i dont want it to destroy what you described. i just want more variety.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:33:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
how about a mod which has to be activated that works like a cyno. destroyer cannot move, everybody in system knows someone is searching for a cloaker. sure it can has severe drawbacks.

how about NO?

Gemberslaafje
Vivicide
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:34:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Nautsyn Thome
i dont want it to destroy what you described. i just want more variety.


Quoted for being the OP's thoughts.

Really, the last thing I want is for people to be safe. But I think, even WITH destroyers being able to know the proximity of cloakers, people still aren't safe. It could, in fact, create a false sense of security, where people rely too much on destroyers. Destroyers have enough counters, and cruiser-sized cloakies can destroy destroyers.

And yes, it could become a slippery slope. But I would never, EVER be for anything even remotely rendering cloaks useless. What I am for, is a cat and mouse game where intel can be used on either sides advantage.

In summary:

For:
Cat & Mouse games
False senses of security
Multiple people working together

Against:
Rendering AFK cloakers useless
Disabling cloakers to be able to bust gate camps
Allowing a single person (with multiple accounts) to be perfectly safe (anywhere)

And yes, especially that last point needs careful consideration. But that doesn't mean the basic idea can't be adapted to improve it.

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2011.08.31 13:36:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
how about NO?


i think it's safe from here to ignore you. this is a suggestion forum, dont act like i persuade ccp into doing what i want, just by typing my thought. grow up.


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