| Author |
Topic |
Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United |
Posted - 2011.09.01 12:57:00 - [ 1]
There's the complaints about afk cloakers, about removing or not removing local, blah blah... I think, and I'd like to toss this out there, that there's a fairly simple (conceptually) idea that would alleviate many of these perceived issues...
1. Cloaked ships, when cloaked, disappear from local. You can't see a cloaked ship by any other means, it only makes sense that they're also cut off from these public communication channels. As a result...
2. Cloaked ships also cannot see local. When cloaked, you can't use local as an intel gathering tool. You either need to decloak to see who's in local or use other means... dscan, probes or even your own eyeballs.
3. To prevent this from being abused regarding hot drops, when a ship decloaks there's a delay to being able to fire a cyno, say 30 or 60 seconds hypothetically. This would give someone a fighting chance to try and escape or call for help before the sqaud of supers drops on their heads. |
Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United |
Posted - 2011.09.01 13:02:00 - [ 2]
One thing this does is eliminate the whole "afk cloaker" issue, in two way. First, if the locals can't see the cloaked ship, they won't be *****ing about seeing an afk cloaker in their system. Second, it's balanced by the cloaked vessels not being able to simply sit there and passively gather intel... it puts the intel gathering into the 'actively acquired' mode. However, a well-planned cloakie can easily be at a belt or whatever actively watching traffic come and go with no one having a clue as to his presence. It also reduces to a degree the excessively easy intel local gives you. Cloaking will cut you off from passive intel, both for and against. Most importantly, there's nothing here that would break wormholes.  I think it's an idea worth discussion. |
foksieloy
Minmatar
Rockets ponies and rainbows
|
Posted - 2011.09.01 13:22:00 - [ 3]
You know what, I am drunk enough to support this. |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
|
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:36:00 - [ 4]
It seems we've both hidden our agenda in the same place ;)
|
Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:00:00 - [ 5]
Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 02/09/2011 13:00:29
I gather the lack of expected responses is due to the many interested people's slow, well-thought-out deliberations over the benefits of such a model... |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD
Tragedy.
|
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:41:00 - [ 6]
It actually doesn't sound like such a bad idea. I can see this being a bit of an exploitable device for fleet ops...both for and against. I would basically just make local an unreliable intel gathering tool. I would support this. |
Signal11th |
Posted - 2011.09.02 15:59:00 - [ 7]
Edited by: Signal11th on 02/09/2011 16:09:24
How about a slight tweak to your method? a cloaked ship doesn't appear in local but when they activate a mod (not the cloak of course) e.g a probe launcher, on board scanner they pop up, get's rid of the argument about afk cloaking because if they pop up you know they are not afk?
Also if they don't activate anything apart from a cloak they disappear from local after a couple of minutes?? |
Diaxess
Curses Mom
|
Posted - 2011.09.03 13:19:00 - [ 8]
Edited by: Diaxess on 03/09/2011 13:20:29
+1 |
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2011.09.03 15:49:00 - [ 9]
hmm....
on 1 hand, stealth gangs and solo ops to kill botters solo pvp becomes bot hunting, works for me.
on the other, stealth gangs to kill legitimate mining ops that if u think about it have no real defense if they cant tell your coming. (no pvp******s, this isnt a good thing)
I accept this on the basis that no one mines in 0.0 |
All Channels
Assembly Hall
