open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Idea gathering] Cloakers
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Highfield
Caldari
I.M.M
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2010.02.28 13:19:00 - [1]
 

Since the buff cloaking vessels got last year, especially bombers, we've seen them taking a far more active posture and they fulfil the covert ops niche role gracefully. This leads to me, amongst others, thinking about it as a way of electronic warfare. ECM has a counterpart, ECCM. Sensor Dampening has a counterpart, sensor boosting. Tracking computers have tracking disruptors, and speed is countered by webs, scrams and targetpainters. There is however no way to influence the advantage a cloak brings to people.

Of course, this is part of their role. But I think there should be a way to eighter prevent cloaking on grid, or search for the location of a cloaker in system. I envision there are loads of other techniques possible. How about we put some of those in this thread, so maybe the CSM can take it up to CCP to take a look at them? This thread isn't intended to discuss the feastability of this tactic, since we won't get a unifying stance on that i'm afraid.

With regards,

Highfield

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.02.28 13:23:00 - [2]
 

Disclaimer:

- I fly cloaked ships myself
- I believe cloaking is a great mechanic

But I also think it needs *some sort* of counter. Nothing as drastic as being able to probe out cloaked ships or any other nerf to that extent, but something. If you have something constructive to add on this topic, please do.

- Sok.

darius mclever
Posted - 2010.02.28 13:29:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Disclaimer:

- I fly cloaked ships myself
- I believe cloaking is a great mechanic

But I also think it needs *some sort* of counter. Nothing as drastic as being able to probe out cloaked ships or any other nerf to that extent, but something. If you have something constructive to add on this topic, please do.

- Sok.


black star might be a bit butthurt from panda team stealthbomber drops.

Tagami Wasp
Caldari
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.02.28 14:18:00 - [4]
 

There is a counter already. Target cloaking ship: no cloak.

If you think about having anti-claok stuff in game, first you have to remove ALL the disadvantages for using one: think about it, would you like having instalocking claokers that you can't decloak by proximity (you'd need the special module for that after all)?

Stop whining about cloakers, there are quite a few ways to counter them and it only needs smart flying.


Not supported.

Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.28 14:36:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Kilostream on 28/02/2010 14:38:02
I'm not sure I see how you made the leap from a ship being able to cloak to cloaks being a form of electronic warfare.

Electronic warfare as I understand it is the use of electronic disruption devices to disable or negatively affect the operation of a ships weapons/propulsion/targetting systems.
Cloaking devices do none of these things and, moreover, they negatively affect the propulsion and targetting systems of the ship they're fitted to!
Whichever way I look at it I cannot see how a cloaking device would fit in to the category of 'electronic warfare system' - it's simply not, it's just an electronic system.

You also state in your post that there is no way to influence the advantage a cloak brings to people when in fact there is: - proximity. if you get close enough to a cloaked ship, the cloak is deactivated without the pilot's consent.
If you wish to increase your chances of a successful de-cloak you need to increase your effective size (popping your drones and selecting "return and orbit" is an example of how to do this).

Much as I'd love to be able to track down, decloak and kill all the isk-famers proliferating in my neck of the woods, I can't support this idea.

Highfield
Caldari
I.M.M
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2010.02.28 15:26:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Highfield on 28/02/2010 15:27:17
For as far as the proximity goes you're totally right. This feature still should be in place. I am therefore not pledging for a de-cloaking device, but a way to get on grid with those ****ers so the proximity thing can actually be used. Think of it as a way to give the cloakhunters a way to get the fight to the cloaker.

Once detected it is purely on the skill of the cloaky pilot to eighter evade ships on grid, warp out (bless if you have a covops cloak) or sit tight and hope the best for it. This makes catching macroratters possible, and gives the cloakhunters at least a chance to get a fight against those annoying red cloakers in home systems. I do however think that a slight increase in the proximity factor to lets say 5km is viable.

Grarr Dexx
Amarr
Kumovi
The G0dfathers
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:04:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Sokratesz
Disclaimer:

- I fly cloaked ships myself
- I believe cloaking is a great mechanic

But I also think it needs *some sort* of counter. Nothing as drastic as being able to probe out cloaked ships or any other nerf to that extent, but something. If you have something constructive to add on this topic, please do.

- Sok.


black star might be a bit butthurt from panda team stealthbomber drops.


Razz

z story
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:17:00 - [8]
 

perhaps the problem is not the cloak but your pilots ?

if you dont like the cloak there is still some mission to run in empire ...

Santiago Fahahrri
Gallente
Galactic Geographic
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:36:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Tagami Wasp
there are quite a few ways to counter them and it only needs smart flying.


This and:
A cloak comes with disadvantages/weaknesses. In a lot of ways a cloak is it's own counter-measure.

and:
If the stealth bombers are having a much larger impact on the game after being changed, (bombers are the common scapegoat/example in these discussions) that's an entirely different thread.

Omega Flames
Caldari
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
Posted - 2010.02.28 23:54:00 - [10]
 


bluenzo
Posted - 2010.03.01 07:07:00 - [11]
 

Just thought of this. Maybe an anti-cloaking bubble? You can't cloak inside the bubble? Just a thought. And can't be overlapped with any type of warp disruption bubble. One or other. Not both.

2PROVIEF
Section XIII
Cursed Alliance
Posted - 2010.03.01 09:19:00 - [12]
 



an active module that when activated provide a cloak disruptor on a 15 or 30 angle in front of your ship with something like 5km range ,that can help to uncloak ships when they jump on a gate without being to much uber (and create a new t2 destroyer who will be the only one able to fit that module can be fun to)

that can be fun to play that and give a more easier way to uncloak but keep need some piloting skills to use


Van Haulen
Posted - 2010.03.01 10:19:00 - [13]
 

I would be opposed to any area effect that uncloaks everybody on the grid, or anything else of the sort; this negates the point of the cloak.

I do, however, have sympathy for wanting to get rid of AFK cloaking. It would be good if you posted a little bit more about what you wanted to achieve, I guess.

Things I would consent to:
  • Covert probe launcher on Black Ops ships, scans down cloaked vessels
  • Module activation time on covert ops; 30 minutes cycle. After that, pilot has to reactivate.

Mr Stark
Posted - 2010.03.01 11:29:00 - [14]
 

maybe cloaks need to use more capacitor, or have a shorter cycle time, so afk cloakers have a harder time fitting their ship to permacloak.

Or like the guy said, a 30 minute cyle and cant auto re activate...


TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
Posted - 2010.03.01 11:59:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Highfield
Since the buff cloaking vessels got last year

The "buff" where cloaked ships now decloak each other that was supposed to be a bug that was going to be fixed and so far nothing has changed?


IMO covert ops cloaks should remain unprobable and be operational for as long as you want to run them (afk or not). The ships are designed around a covert cloak and thus shouldn't need to burn cap etc to keep them running.


However I would be interested in hearing ideas for changes to the prototype (and T2 improved) cloaks.

Personally I think they should be sized so that, for example, a battleship needs a battleship sized cloak (and a capital needs a capital cloak) with higher fitting requirements.

Another idea would be for non-covert cloaked ships to show up on directional though masked from overview/visual so if you are on grid you could locate them given enough time and skill. This wouldn't stop people warping to a safe to cloak but would mean only covert ships can lurk at a gate to feed intel to the rest of the gang.

Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2010.03.01 12:29:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Xtover on 01/03/2010 12:30:53
I always wanted to see T2 destroyers able to dumbfire (like bombs) depth charges of sorts that fires a burst to decloak a ship within the AoE radius.

-or-

able to probe to the grid that a cloaked ship is on.. that means you can probe within a 250km radius from the ship... hardly a nerf to cloaking.

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.03.01 14:22:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Xtover
Edited by: Xtover on 01/03/2010 12:30:53
I always wanted to see T2 destroyers able to dumbfire (like bombs) depth charges of sorts that fires a burst to decloak a ship within the AoE radius.

-or-

able to probe to the grid that a cloaked ship is on.. that means you can probe within a 250km radius from the ship... hardly a nerf to cloaking.


In homeworld 2 you had a 'sensors ping' thingy on tiny little scout frigs that would unveil cloaked ships within a certain radius..I could see that working for eve as long as it was a specialised role that required an expensive ship and lots of skilling.

Larkonis Trassler
Doctrine.
Posted - 2010.03.01 14:55:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Xtover
Edited by: Xtover on 01/03/2010 12:30:53
I always wanted to see T2 destroyers able to dumbfire (like bombs) depth charges of sorts that fires a burst to decloak a ship within the AoE radius.

-or-

able to probe to the grid that a cloaked ship is on.. that means you can probe within a 250km radius from the ship... hardly a nerf to cloaking.


In homeworld 2 you had a 'sensors ping' thingy on tiny little scout frigs that would unveil cloaked ships within a certain radius..I could see that working for eve as long as it was a specialised role that required an expensive ship and lots of skilling.


New T2 Destroyer tbh... Like some sort of anti submarine hunter but IN SPACE! Make it consume some sort of ammo or something with a decent cooldown and short to medium range (10-20km maybe). Only problem is that it would spell the death knell for cov ops and recons jumping into 0.0 bubble camps.


Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2010.03.01 16:35:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Xtover on 01/03/2010 16:37:57
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Only problem is that it would spell the death knell for cov ops and recons jumping into 0.0 bubble camps.



If it was an on-grid "ping" it should be based upon sensor strength, in which most recons already have an advantage.

Id suggest bosting whatever counter there is for blockade runners though.

edit:

However I'm moe in love with a grid-wide probing than a local grid detection tool.

cov ops are supposed to be "the" spy ship first, a combat ship second.

a proto cloak should not be able to cover a capship in a hostil system for hours at a time, or someone going AFK to work in a vaga only to decloak and strike whenever.. it's risk free.

Also, on the other side of the coin, I hate seeing ratters who safe+cloak the minute local goes +1.


It's more the non-covops cloaks that are being abused.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.03.01 17:55:00 - [20]
 

I am really in favour of such things, however you indeed need to make sure it does not affect people who jump in gatecamp and want to get away by cloaking. A suficiently long warm up period would do that.

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.03.01 18:15:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler

New T2 Destroyer tbh... Like some sort of anti submarine hunter but IN SPACE! Make it consume some sort of ammo or something with a decent cooldown and short to medium range (10-20km maybe). Only problem is that it would spell the death knell for cov ops and recons jumping into 0.0 bubble camps.




That's easily fixed by giving it a 30s activation time.

darius mclever
Posted - 2010.03.01 18:50:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler

New T2 Destroyer tbh... Like some sort of anti submarine hunter but IN SPACE! Make it consume some sort of ammo or something with a decent cooldown and short to medium range (10-20km maybe). Only problem is that it would spell the death knell for cov ops and recons jumping into 0.0 bubble camps.




That's easily fixed by giving it a 30s activation time.


and disallow activation inside warp bubbles?

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.03.01 19:01:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler

New T2 Destroyer tbh... Like some sort of anti submarine hunter but IN SPACE! Make it consume some sort of ammo or something with a decent cooldown and short to medium range (10-20km maybe). Only problem is that it would spell the death knell for cov ops and recons jumping into 0.0 bubble camps.




That's easily fixed by giving it a 30s activation time.


and disallow activation inside warp bubbles?


for example

theres many ways to prevent it from being overpowered

Saerynn
Lost Intentions
Posted - 2010.03.01 19:45:00 - [24]
 

Decloaking a covops jumping into a system is already a test of player skills: the skill of the tackler getting a line on the cloaker vs. the skill of the cloaker in evading the tackler. IMO, no change is needed to the proximity distance as it can already be skewed in the tacklers favour by assigning a drone cloud (with the corresponding countermeasure of drone vulnerability to bombs). Furthermore, there is already a sufficient module reactivation delay (even on a COCD) to prevent someone so decloaked from being able to recloak before being locked and subsequently tackled.

A cloaked ship can't activate modules, reload charges, interact with celestial objects or target other ships - it has an effective DPS of exactly zero. Even after decloaking, it's ability to engage a target is penalized by the sensor recalibration delay. Non-native cloakers incur further significant penalties to their scan resolution and their maximum cloaked velocities.

I support the idea of ship-class sized cloaking devices - it seems reasonable to me that cloaking a capital should require more effort than cloaking a BS. With respect to non-native cloakers, I would consider supporting a very modest fuel consumption OR the ability to probe out their general location (strongly dependent on the mechanism) IF AND ONLY IF that was balanced by a tradeoff against the existing drawbacks; however, in my mind such changes to native cloakers would completely invalidate their role and I'm am completely opposed to them.

Fundamentally, at least in my opinion, there isn't a problem with cloaked ships - the problem is when they uncloak. And for that there are already effective solutions that don't require changes to game mechanics with a very decided risk of borking an entire type of game play.

Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2010.03.01 20:22:00 - [25]
 

I agree that there is a need in many cases for a cloak- for Supercaps and the like.

However it's turned into a catch all and risk free. with the MWD+cloak trick it has become a way to bypass mechanics that people are saying probing would invalidate.

a 30s module delay for the probe (i.e. delayed like an armor repper) and the inability to use the probe in a bubble are two excellent ideas to offset and allow the advantage of cloaking to remain.

fuel consumption is a good idea in itself, but that addresses AFK cloakers only. This would address many things such as farmers and macros in 0.0 which are impossible to catch.

Iletia Alyve
Posted - 2010.03.01 23:52:00 - [26]
 

this topic seems to keep rearing its ugly and useless head over and over add nauseum...there is nothing wrong with the mechanics..thousands of Eve players agree..leave cloaking alone...

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.03.02 07:51:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Iletia Alyve
this topic seems to keep rearing its ugly and useless head over and over add nauseum...there is nothing wrong with the mechanics..thousands of Eve players agree..leave cloaking alone...


If it were an outright whine you'd have a point, but it isn't, so you don't.

Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2010.03.02 12:31:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Iletia Alyve
this topic seems to keep rearing its ugly and useless head over and over add nauseum...there is nothing wrong with the mechanics..thousands of Eve players agree..leave cloaking alone...


I have over 400 kills in the last few months alone from a stealth bomber. I'm not bragging but I love covops ships. I love everything cloaky.

That being said, your'e right. thousands say they're fine yet tens of thousands say they need a counter.

Nobody is looking to nerf cloaks. People just want those that are cloaking to remain active or be hunted.

There's a huge difference.

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.03.02 13:11:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Xtover


Nobody is looking to nerf cloaks. People just want those that are cloaking to remain active or be hunted.

There's a huge difference.



That's a nice summary indeed.

Santiago Fahahrri
Gallente
Galactic Geographic
Posted - 2010.03.02 13:37:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Xtover


Nobody is looking to nerf cloaks. People just want those that are cloaking to remain active or be hunted.

There's a huge difference.



That's a nice summary indeed.


And that's what I'm opposed to. In deep space (deep 0.0 or w-space) the cloak is often the only "dock" available. Pilots who fly far often don't have the luxury of being able to dock up when it's time to go make lunch or something.

Safe spot + cloak = explorers dock.

I'm absolutely willing to accept afk cloakers to keep this functionality in the game. Remember, one of the prime advantages of Eve over other games for players with families/jobs/busy lives is the ability to walk away from the game and deal with life. Cloaking up (just like docking) is a part of that.


Pages: [1] 2

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