open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Petition: Cloaking Devices
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Asariasha
Caldari
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2006.12.19 19:43:00 - [1]
 

Hello,

there seems to be a major problem about cloaking devices on
non-covert/recon ships.
Currently almost every NPC hunting ship in 0.0 space has got
a cloaking device fitted. Of course cloaking devices will
apply the scan resolution penalty on those ships, but unfortunately
this penalty is by far not enough if you consider that you
gain absolute safety, because you can't even be probed by a
covert OPs.

I suggest to modify the cloaking devices CPU usage to...

Prototype Cloaking Device: 1060tf
Improved Cloaking Device: 1030tf
all named cloakings: "current CPU need" + 1000tf

To enable ForceRecon ships and StealthBombers to still fit
these devices, there should be added a bonus that lowers
CPU need for cloaking devices by 1000tf.

Greets
Asa

Kharakan
Amarr
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2006.12.19 20:15:00 - [2]
 

So you're restricting the cloaking devices to a sum total of about 12 ships? Confused

Petrothian Tong
Gallente
Posted - 2006.12.19 21:08:00 - [3]
 

errrrm if you do that, you will make the proto and improve cloak useless....and nothing but components for building covert op cloaks...

there is a reason there stiff penalities in speed in the non-covert op one (what? 75 to 90% penality?) and that the covert op one can only be mounted in recons and S.Bs...








Nisse Owned
The Order of Chivalry
Posted - 2006.12.19 22:41:00 - [4]
 

I just think the cloaks got enough penalties, if they were like you suggest noone would ever use one, and what ship got 1000 cpu but the industrials, really bad idea...

Asariasha
Caldari
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2006.12.20 03:31:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Asariasha on 20/12/2006 03:39:30

Well, the intention IS that ships which aren't really meant to
use cloaks become unable to use them Wink
The point is that it is absolutely disgusting to see that almost
every hunter in 0.0 space got one fitted. So, they have a 100%
guarantee to not get killed in pvp. Just warp out to your safe
spot and cloak. This is even worse than the pre-nerfed warp core
stabs, because the penalty of -50% signature resolution (40% if
you fit an inproved cloaking) just means that you have a slightly
higher locking time for rats in your belt.

It's just the same like logoff-skiing, only that you don't need
to log out Rolling Eyes
I think that there shouldn't be a 100% safety in 0.0
space in terms of pvp. Unfortunately cloaking devices on BS
currently support this 100% safety.
So, the solution is obvious. Make cloaking devices only available
to dedicated cloaking ships...just as intended.

@Petrothian Tong: Please read what i suggested and
check the item database & shipboni. CovertOps cloaking devices
have got a CPU need of 10000tf. So you wouldn't be able to
fit a CovertOps cloaking onto a StealthBomber or CombatRecon
which means they are still in need of Prototype or Improved
cloakings.

Greets
Asa

Nahia Senne
Initium Malum
Posted - 2006.12.20 03:44:00 - [6]
 

cloaks have enough penalties as it is. i would say we should remove some instead of adding more... like locking time penalty. would make them viable in pvp.

Engle
Viziam
Posted - 2006.12.20 04:24:00 - [7]
 

I say cloaks are fine, there are too many other things to worry about before nerfing cloaks.

Warden Nightstar
Caldari
Posted - 2006.12.20 04:36:00 - [8]
 

Cloaks are just fine. They give up a lot to mount one. It's all about sacrifices.

Oarta
Posted - 2006.12.20 08:24:00 - [9]
 

I don't think the benefit you describe would warrant further restricting the use of cloaking devices. You can achieve the same effect, not being found, by moving around from safe spot to safe spot. The cloak does let you sit still and gain the safe effect, but it does give some nasty penalties that could be very hazardous should you get caught.

Asariasha
Caldari
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2006.12.20 16:36:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Asariasha on 20/12/2006 16:40:28
Speaking about penalties. The only reasonable penalty is that
your scan resolution is reduced by 40% which means at all that
you need around 15-20seconds to lock on a Battleship. While
you are killing the BS spawns, smaller targets like NPC frigs
may be targeted and be taken care of before you finished for
example two of three BS of a 3BS/3Cruiser or frig spawn.
So, if you are hunting rats in 0.0 you don't care about that
minor penalty, because in exchange you gain absolute safety
in terms of pvp.
The second penalty is that you are unable to lock on targets for
a few seconds after uncloaking which to be honest only takes effect
if you run into a gatecamp cloak and get uncloaked. However,
running into a gatecamp would mean the loss of your BS at all.

It is just disgusting to see BS pilots abusing this device while
hunting in 0.0 to prevent pvp-engagements.
However, reading those replies makes me feel there are almost
only carebears left in EvE Rolling Eyes

Greets
Asa

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2006.12.20 21:59:00 - [11]
 

Let's put it this way... cloaks were MEANT to be used by basically everybody who WANTS to sacrifice targetting speed for a bit of safety... that safety got SIGNIFICANTLY reduced by the fact you can now PROBE cloaked ships too.

You know, just like those using WCSs are now sacrificing targetting range for a bit of safety.
Would you like to have WCSs with 1k tf usage and give indys -99% CPU usage for WCSs ?

Back to the cloaks... even if probed, you still need to get within 2km of them to decloak.
Agreed, not easy to do probably, but still, hardly "invulnerable".


Leave the darn cloaks alone, they're pathetic enough already anyway.
And in case you didn't know, MOST of EVE are carebears, there would be next to no EVE without carebears.
Those that pirate or PvP were either once carebears, are supported by carebears, or have a carebear alt.
Exceptions to the rule exist, but so minimal as to be statistically insignificant.

So, basically, all I'm saying is: ZIP IT. Seriously.

Asariasha
Caldari
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2006.12.20 22:30:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Asariasha on 20/12/2006 22:41:00
Sorry, thats a wrong information you got there. It is still
not possible to probe cloaked ships. Thats at least what I
know Wink
And about your example of WCS only fittable on Indus...
If cloaking devices had a higher penalty I wouldn't
complain about them. Of course these penalties would have to
be neutralized by skills on cloak-dedicated ships.
However, currently cloaking devices are pretty much similar
to the pre-nerfed WCS with a minor penalty.

You could also apply an additional targeting range penalty
similar to WCS, but this penalty would have to be a bit higher
(around 75%), because you don't need to fit 2 or 3 like WCS Wink
It's just ridicolous that the meant to be dangerous 0.0 space
becomes an oasis of safety by just one fitted module.

Greets
Asa

Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
House of El
Posted - 2006.12.21 11:11:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Jaketh Ivanes on 21/12/2006 11:14:48
Wow.. getting annoyed that you can't kill the ratters..

pesky piwate Rolling EyesSmile

EDIT: A bit more contrsuctive. Lets look at the options a pirate has.. 1: He can lock the system down with bubbles. 2: He can bust SS with probes. 3: He isn't alerting the ratter when he is scanning the system for the location.
Lets look at the counter options for the ratter. 1: MWD i guess. 2: Keep warping around or use cloak 3: None really.

Xantina
Lyonesse.
KIA Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.21 11:18:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Xantina on 21/12/2006 11:19:12
Currently a cloak on a non-covop or recon ship isn't good for anything but hiding a valuable ship.
That is a valid use of cloaking shields since all dedicated stealth ships are capable of using a better than prototype cloak.
The assumption that all other ships aren't meant to use one is therefore apparently wrong.

Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
House of El
Posted - 2006.12.21 12:42:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Xantina
Edited by: Xantina on 21/12/2006 11:19:12
Currently a cloak on a non-covop or recon ship isn't good for anything but hiding a valuable ship.
That is a valid use of cloaking shields since all dedicated stealth ships are capable of using a better than prototype cloak.
The assumption that all other ships aren't meant to use one is therefore apparently wrong.


Actually doesn't sound like a bad idea. But we have to go all the way.
So, Amarr ships are the only ships that may use laser. Missiles are limited to Caldari. Projectile to Minnies.
Armor tanking is the only tank an amarr can use.. no shield mods of any kind what so ever. Caldari may not use armor tanks of any kind.
Jamming is prohibited by all ships, except the Balckbird, Scorpion and Rook.
TD's are only to be used by Arbitrators.
Webbers by the minnie ship with appropiate bonuses (think its the minnie one)
Nosses and Neut can now only be fitted on Blood ships and the Curse.

Yes, sounds like a good idea to only use modules on "inteded" ships Laughing

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2006.12.21 12:45:00 - [16]
 

Cloaks are fine. The fact that you cannot use them while you are targetted by someone is enough of a drawback (not even taking in account the speed and locking time penalty)

Kharakan
Amarr
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2006.12.21 16:54:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Kharakan on 21/12/2006 16:54:27
The inability to use cloaks while target is enough, as Sokrates said. If you target someone they can't cloak so you can blow them up or whatever. If they get away despite this and then cloak, you've fumbled the opportunity and that's it, better luck next time. Eve is not big on 'second chances'.

Cosmic Flame
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2006.12.21 17:27:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Asariasha
Edited by: Asariasha on 20/12/2006 03:39:30

Well, the intention IS that ships which aren't really meant to
use cloaks become unable to use them Wink
The point is that it is absolutely disgusting to see that almost
every hunter in 0.0 space got one fitted. So, they have a 100%
guarantee to not get killed in pvp. Just warp out to your safe
spot and cloak. This is even worse than the pre-nerfed warp core
stabs, because the penalty of -50% signature resolution (40% if
you fit an inproved cloaking) just means that you have a slightly
higher locking time for rats in your belt.

It's just the same like logoff-skiing, only that you don't need
to log out Rolling Eyes
I think that there shouldn't be a 100% safety in 0.0
space in terms of pvp. Unfortunately cloaking devices on BS
currently support this 100% safety.
So, the solution is obvious. Make cloaking devices only available
to dedicated cloaking ships...just as intended.

@Petrothian Tong: Please read what i suggested and
check the item database & shipboni. CovertOps cloaking devices
have got a CPU need of 10000tf. So you wouldn't be able to
fit a CovertOps cloaking onto a StealthBomber or CombatRecon
which means they are still in need of Prototype or Improved
cloakings.

Greets
Asa


So what you are proposing is that we go from a situation where whoever is hunting has a chance to actually run and hide, to a situation where enemies jumping into current system = you're dead 100% because there will be no way to run from them... Unless you forgot, 30 secs to 1 minute is all it takes to find a target in space now with recon probe launchers. Which means you can get to a victim before he has a chance to warp off again to a new SS. Or if for some reason you can't get to him before that, he can't log off or stop warping every 20 seconds because he will die...

Recently i was in a gang who was chasing another hostile gang. They got cornered in a system. Our co-ops pilot kept finding them in their SS so fast that they ended up just giving up and suicided against us, simply because there was no way to hide.
TBH, i don't like the excessive efficiency in the probe system now. Anyone trying to run or hide has little to no defense. That's not balance.

What you propose is way too biased of a point of view. Cloaks are just fine as they are.

Romulan Dominiae
Posted - 2006.12.21 18:35:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Romulan Dominiae on 21/12/2006 18:36:08
Originally by: Asariasha
Hello,

there seems to be a major problem about cloaking devices on
non-covert/recon ships.
Currently almost every NPC hunting ship in 0.0 space has got
a cloaking device fitted. Of course cloaking devices will
apply the scan resolution penalty on those ships, but unfortunately
this penalty is by far not enough if you consider that you
gain absolute safety, because you can't even be probed by a
covert OPs.

I suggest to modify the cloaking devices CPU usage to...

Prototype Cloaking Device: 1060tf
Improved Cloaking Device: 1030tf
all named cloakings: "current CPU need" + 1000tf

To enable ForceRecon ships and StealthBombers to still fit
these devices, there should be added a bonus that lowers
CPU need for cloaking devices by 1000tf.

Greets
Asa



lol how lame you are. isnt it fair that SOLO players have a small chance do slip away from ownage from groups? when engaged with npcs they cannot cloak anyway.

why dont you just suggest a frig sized doomsday device that pops everyone you want in any system you decide while sitting in a station in new cladari?


Doppler Shift
Posted - 2006.12.21 21:17:00 - [20]
 

I am tired of useless hunters that want to change the game mechanics because they are not competent enough to catch their prey.

If you cannot hunt, be the prey and leave the rest of the world alone. These posts are useless.

I am not even going to try and explain why that is a matter of competence. Needless to say, a cloaked (non-recon or covop) ship is NOT undetectable lol.

Asariasha
Caldari
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2006.12.22 00:56:00 - [21]
 

@Jaketh Ivanes: It was only a suggestion to disable non-recon/coverts
fitting a cloaking device. A harder penalty for using them
on non-recon/coverts would be ok, too. The current penalty
of -40-50% signature resolution is just not enough compared
to the effect you gain by using such a device. A additional
targeting range penalty of 40-50% would be ok - just like
on WCS - because a cloaking device gives you the opportunity
of avoiding PvP.

@Kharakan: being unable to cloak when targeted doesn't effect
the fact that a hunter in 0.0 becomes undetectable by warping
to his safespot and activating his cloaking device. The only
chance to get a hunter is when he might be warpscrambled by
NPC pirates...if he isn't he will just safespot and cloak.

@Cosmic Flame: Nerfing cloaking devices in a way so that only
ReconShips and CovertOPs class ships could fit them wouldn't
mean that a belthunter is dead for 100% when someone warps in.
The pilot would just have to warp from safespot to safespot
to avoid getting busted by probing. So, the hunter has got
a chance to avoid getting ganked while players looking for
them have exactly no chance to get him when he cloaks.
Like I said, if there was a harder penalty on the cloaking
devices for non-covert/recons like an additional targeting
range penalty of 50% it would be fair, because the hunter had
to sacrifice 1-2med slots for sensor boosters in exchange for
his ultimate anti-pvp mechanism.
About your little story hunting some guys...well, I don't like
the new - much too easy - scanning system. However, a ship
specialized in detecting ships should be able to do so, but
currently there is almost no need for a covert due to players
exessively using cloaking devices while hunting.
Had some roaming gangs down south and almost every solo-hunter
had fitted a cloaking device which caused just boredom.

@Romulan Dominiae: please stop getting personal. I just want
to discuss the cloaking device situation. And just for you to
know (if you havent read the above written). Solo plaayers
have got a chance to get away. If you see a hostile jumping
into your system just warp to your safespot and use your
directional scanner to avoid getting busted on your safe!

@Doppler Shift: I really like people trying to evaluate the
sense of certain topics. Of course I can hunt, but I can not
hunt which is undetectable, but maybe you want to share your
wisdom instead of trolling around? So, how do you probe cloaked
ships...with your magic fairy wand?

Greets
Asa






Doppler Shift
Posted - 2006.12.22 05:04:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Doppler Shift on 22/12/2006 05:06:40
Apologies. Rereading my post I see it comes out a bit ruder than I intended.
I still believe that the proposed solution is completely and utterly useless. Because it shoots a completely wrong target - the "frequency" and "ease of use" of cloak rather than the cloak itself. Which led me to believe that you are out for blood and not finding it rather than being frustrated at some peoples apparent invulnerability. Worse still, the proposed solution is completely off the subject - there is a reason that there are 3 cloaking devices, and it is not about price - it is about "inferior" cloaking all ships can use and "true" (recon) cloaking covops and recons get. All this is PERFECT. Fantastic implementation, exploit-less, balanced boni and penalties. The problem is COMPLETELY ELSEWHERE.

Let me explain.

The problem is not cloaking, it is the probe's inability to detect cloaked. A cloaked person can go for coffee, that's your problem isn't it?

So the problem is not the cloak's restrictions - whatever the penalties the problem persists. Even a recon pilot should not be able to go for coffee behind enemy lines.

BUT: Probes are now (after the revelations patches) able to detect cloaked opponents.

In any case, the whole problem has nothing to do with who fits cloaks and how much locking penalty he gets. It is a matter of being able probe a cloaked guy, even with some difficulty. The added difficulty would be that in order to catch him you need a 0m accuracy so you land on top of him and uncloak him

Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
House of El
Posted - 2006.12.22 13:02:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Asariasha
@Jaketh Ivanes: It was only a suggestion to disable non-recon/coverts
fitting a cloaking device. A harder penalty for using them
on non-recon/coverts would be ok, too. The current penalty
of -40-50% signature resolution is just not enough compared
to the effect you gain by using such a device. A additional
targeting range penalty of 40-50% would be ok - just like
on WCS - because a cloaking device gives you the opportunity
of avoiding PvP.




And whats wrong with advoiding PvP? If you chase me down the street, is it unfair if i run faster than you or find a good hiding place?

Chewan Mesa
Resurrection
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2006.12.22 13:10:00 - [24]
 

Sorry but your argumentation doesnt make any sense.

You say cloaks help people avoid pvp, aka getting ganked while ratting. Thats simply wrong.

Being on their toes, watching local and warping to a safespot lets them avoid pvp/getting ganked.

They simply dont warp around between 5 Safespots and then log out, but sit tight and cloak...either way, you dont kill them.


 

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