open All Channels
seplocked Warfare & Tactics
blankseplocked AFK stealth bullying - redesigning the cloak
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 : last (16)

Author Topic

Jeneroux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.03 04:37:00 - [391]
 

Fix AFK...
Inactivity timeout.


Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 06:15:00 - [392]
 

Edited by: Voith on 03/08/2010 06:15:12
Originally by: Quixis
Originally by: Voith
Something about nublets.


I have no fear of people playing the game, you are mistaken, much like your ideas.

The whole concept of cloaking would be diminished with your idea.

  • Want to gain a good warp in spot on the enemy fleet, well no you can't they are probing for it.

  • Want to keep tabs on enemy movements, well no you can't they are probing for it.

Your idea will be the de-facto thing for all alliances, removing many reasons for the whole covert op concept.
Yea, I can see you thought that one through really well, I feel sorry for you.

I read well, I see you failing to play the game well and whining about your failure.
I see your failure to understand the consequences, of the changes you are asking for.
I also see the weak minded fear you have, for people who are apparently by conjecture, not playing.

Next.

Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.


We are playing Rope-a-dope.

PS. You are the dope.

The 1Au meant that the person cloaked had to be in the same 1AU area for half an hour. Your cov ops just has to warp around every 29 minutes to avoid being probed. Or even just go if the warp drive was active in the last 30 minutes.

It has 0 effect on people who are not AFK.

You are so quick to claim that one change to cov ops would ruin the game, but you're so ignorant you forget that for a while there was no Cov ops, there was no functional probing system. This change wouldn't remove the need for Cov Ops, it would increase the need for them.

But you're too busy trying to hold onto a crutch you need because you are a horrible player with horrible corp mates who don't know how to play Eve. "Fixing" Local or removing Cloaking or any other change will not help you fail at Eve less.


Seriously, just give up. You keep walking into trap after trap after trap. Because you are dumb and do not understand the game.

Honestly, I can't imagine being stupid enough to think that such a non-change would have people ditch Cov ops. Have you ever PvPed before? Having eyes on the enemy is a huge damn thing and almost no change will alter the fact that any FC worth his weight in rubber dog **** will want scouts.

Many times I forget just how bad pubbies are at this game. Thanks for reminding me. Give up scouting? That sound you hear the everyone with a clue laughing at you.



Originally by: Jeneroux
Fix AFK...
Inactivity timeout.



Macros.

Quixis
Posted - 2010.08.03 09:31:00 - [393]
 

Originally by: Voith

We are playing Rope-a-dope.

PS. You are the dope.

Has anyone ever told you how cute you are when you're angry. Very Happy
Do you get like this, when you play board games and lose? Must happen a lot. Sad

Originally by: Voith
The 1Au meant that the person cloaked had to be in the same 1AU area for half an hour. Your cov ops just has to warp around every 29 minutes to avoid being probed. Or even just go if the warp drive was active in the last 30 minutes.

It has 0 effect on people who are not AFK.

You can make stuff up as we go along, I don't mind. You have some very special ideas.
I do like your ideas on low sec and that being docked is risky, it shows me just how special you are.

Originally by: Voith
You are so quick to claim that one change to cov ops would ruin the game, but you're so ignorant you forget that for a while there was no Cov ops, there was no functional probing system. This change wouldn't remove the need for Cov Ops, it would increase the need for them.

But you're too busy trying to hold onto a crutch you need because you are a horrible player with horrible corp mates who don't know how to play Eve. "Fixing" Local or removing Cloaking or any other change will not help you fail at Eve less.

Did mentioned fixing local or removing cloaks? You're starting to rant, must be that anger.
Oh and cloaks first appeared in 04.
Not sure what you're point is, many things have been added since, with a thing called expansions. It's something CCP does every year, in case you missed it.

But still, lets stop that AFK cloaker, he's stopping you playing and making your weak mind play tricks on you.


Originally by: Voith
Seriously, just give up. You keep walking into trap after trap after trap. Because you are dumb and do not understand the game.

Irony, you gotta love it.

Originally by: Voith
Honestly, I can't imagine being stupid enough to think that such a non-change would have people ditch Cov ops. Have you ever PvPed before? Having eyes on the enemy is a huge damn thing and almost no change will alter the fact that any FC worth his weight in rubber dog **** will want scouts.

Many times I forget just how bad pubbies are at this game. Thanks for reminding me. Give up scouting? That sound you hear the everyone with a clue laughing at you.

You must be very hard of hearing then, because since you ventured into this thread, most of eve has been in stitches.
Still scared of that person not playing?

Next.
Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.

adilaNNN
Caldari
inFluX.
Legiunea ROmana
Posted - 2010.08.03 09:57:00 - [394]
 

oh god why don't you loosers go do somethin else with your time instead of cryin about someone who is afk in a frigate!/cruiser!.. i'm sure they're doin somethin alot more fun whilst laughin at you babies.
cloakin is fine.

lol @ OP...
Quote:
on a potentially destructive ship

Lia'Vael
Caldari
Migrant Fleet
Posted - 2010.08.03 10:17:00 - [395]
 

Edited by: Lia''Vael on 03/08/2010 10:28:03
Hey Quixis, enjoying the lack of logic from Voith? Once he realizes he has nothing he'll leave again, although when he came back I was surprised he seemed to have put a little effort in his argument.

Anyways going back on the topic of AFK cloakers (ooh so scawy boo hoo). Every single person with an ounce of intelligence would realize the first step of killing off AFK (It stands of Away From Keyboard by the way) is to implement inactivity timeout. Since the subject matter should be AFK not the cloak.

On the topic of Local as a tool, Hmm let me look at it here with my glasses, oh it looks like it is meant as a chat. Local as it stands gives a lot of information, anyone with half a brain can gather quite a bit of information. Wormholes are in no way a comparison to what a world without local would look like, what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0.

If local gets changed I would definitely get behind a possible cloak change and cloak specialized ship change. But those that are dependent on local intel wont give it up without a fight (and they'll be kicking and screaming all along the way too). But to be honest its not needed, the resources and time CCP would spend are better used on something that does need fixing/polish.

On the note of Voith, read up on some of his past posts, they do get pretty funny.
*cough*
Originally by: Voith
When I rat I rat in a system so in the middle of no where I don't even see blues there. So I'm not really effected by "AFK Cloaking".


P.S. Voith, where is my rightly deserved Camembert!?

EDIT: Oh yes I forgot my almighty title, WoW-Tard #1. Suck it other WoW/EVE players.

Mackenna
Amarr
GREY COUNCIL
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.08.03 11:45:00 - [396]
 

Originally by: Lia'Vael

Anyways going back on the topic of AFK cloakers (ooh so scawy boo hoo). Every single person with an ounce of intelligence would realize the first step of killing off AFK (It stands of Away From Keyboard by the way) is to implement inactivity timeout. Since the subject matter should be AFK not the cloak.



Indeed. I'm not in favor of ruining cloaking itself as a concept or a tactic. An inactivity timeout is the easiest, most logical first step when considering a counter; but then you realize that we live in a world full of macro software. It wouldn't work.

That is why I proposed a solution that allows people to eventually scan someone down, within hours, if they don't move or heed warnings that they are about to be found.

Originally by: Lia'Vael

On the topic of Local as a tool, Hmm let me look at it here with my glasses, oh it looks like it is meant as a chat. Local as it stands gives a lot of information, anyone with half a brain can gather quite a bit of information. Wormholes are in no way a comparison to what a world without local would look like, what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0.



"Local" is more than a chat channel. It represents a sort of meta-grid for capsuleers. Think of it as less of a chat channel and more of a beacon that interacts with the gates of a system. This is most likely the rationalization for how Locator Agents find pilots. If you doubt this, check out all of the dev notes and videos on Incarna, where they talk about "Walking in Stations" as away of "Getting off the grid". (The "grid" in this case has nothing to do with the overview you see within your capsule.)

Originally by: Lia'Vael

If local gets changed I would definitely get behind a possible cloak change and cloak specialized ship change. But those that are dependent on local intel wont give it up without a fight (and they'll be kicking and screaming all along the way too). But to be honest its not needed, the resources and time CCP would spend are better used on something that does need fixing/polish.



I'm well aware that many people believe that afk-cloaking somehow diminishes "local intel"; It doesn't. The two are not intrinsically linked. Just because you choose to be functionally invulnerable to attack because you don't like the fact that everyone knows you're in a solar system doesn't mean that you MUST do so.


Gumlin31
Posted - 2010.08.03 14:42:00 - [397]
 

Edited by: Gumlin31 on 03/08/2010 14:45:45
I would like to see something akin to anti-submarine warfare to defeat cloakers intent on harassing space you spend millions of isk to keep.

It could be just a simple module that pings only cloaked ships. You would have to go to three different planets in a system and ping the guy three times to triangulate their position. You could give the cloaker a warning message and an audible sound and a minute to move by adding an activation timer and a distance from previous ping spots requirement.

The system would be like probing but you are the probe and using something like active sonar.

This would defeat the afk cloakers, except those that use macros but that's another issue and it would make covert ops probers pay attention. Fleet scouts would be largely unaffected since they move constantly anyway.

It should be as dangerous to go behind enemy lines in a covert ops as it is in a sub or stealth aircraft in real life.

And to be ralistic one would think the empires would pore over stealth modules trying to find a weakness just as real militaries do with subs and stealth to detect them.

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 14:58:00 - [398]
 

Edited by: Voith on 03/08/2010 15:03:36
Edited by: Voith on 03/08/2010 15:02:08
Originally by: Lia'Vael
Edited by: Lia''Vael on 03/08/2010 10:28:03
Hey Quixis, enjoying the lack of logic from Voith? Once he realizes he has nothing he'll leave again, although when he came back I was surprised he seemed to have put a little effort in his argument.

Anyways going back on the topic of AFK cloakers (ooh so scawy boo hoo). Every single person with an ounce of intelligence would realize the first step of killing off AFK (It stands of Away From Keyboard by the way) is to implement inactivity timeout. Since the subject matter should be AFK not the cloak.

On the topic of Local as a tool, Hmm let me look at it here with my glasses, oh it looks like it is meant as a chat. Local as it stands gives a lot of information, anyone with half a brain can gather quite a bit of information. Wormholes are in no way a comparison to what a world without local would look like, what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0.

If local gets changed I would definitely get behind a possible cloak change and cloak specialized ship change. But those that are dependent on local intel wont give it up without a fight (and they'll be kicking and screaming all along the way too). But to be honest its not needed, the resources and time CCP would spend are better used on something that does need fixing/polish.

On the note of Voith, read up on some of his past posts, they do get pretty funny.
*cough*
Originally by: Voith
When I rat I rat in a system so in the middle of no where I don't even see blues there. So I'm not really effected by "AFK Cloaking".


P.S. Voith, where is my rightly deserved Camembert!?

EDIT: Oh yes I forgot my almighty title, WoW-Tard #1. Suck it other WoW/EVE players.



Not all of us can play a game, post of the forums and write Mass Effect slashfic all day!

Please point out any logical inconsistencies that you have found in my posts. Ohh, wait you can't. But you're too dumb to realize that if you just had an inactivity time out everyone would just download autoscript.

Oh, nose you won't go to local free space because it is dangerous!

This is all I really need to do to laugh at you every time you post.
"what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0."
u skeered?

That really is the problem isn't it? You're a horrible player, so even though CCP removed local from 2500 systems with no local you are too frightened of a bit of risk to actually take advantage of the it.

Oh no there is risk!

Which is the real reason why you dislike the idea of cloaks being probable. You want risk free gameplay.


Quote:
I do like your ideas on low sec and that being docked is risky, it shows me just how special you are.



Low sec isn't, Nullsec is. You can easily lose access to fitting service and clone service if the station changes hands.

L2Read.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2010.08.03 15:07:00 - [399]
 

Originally by: Voith

Oh, nose you won't go to local free space because it is dangerous!

I dont go to local free space (WH) because its empty for the most time I looked in there. I dont like searching for hours for a single target if I can go to the next hostile 0.0 region and kill a bunch of poor fitted carebears.

Originally by: Voith

Which is the real reason why you dislike the idea of cloaks being probable. You want risk free gameplay.


every time a cloaker decloaks to do something dangerous to you or your buddies, he takes risks of getting baited/popped because cloaker ships are weak in their nature.

Quixis
Posted - 2010.08.03 15:23:00 - [400]
 

Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Quixis
I do like your ideas on low sec and that being docked is risky, it shows me just how special you are.

Low sec isn't, Nullsec is. You can easily lose access to fitting service and clone service if the station changes hands.

L2Read.


*cough* Did I say docking was related to low sec, erm no. Lets see what I was referring too shall we.

Originally by: Voith
Low Sec is going to suck until CCP adjusts it for 5+ years of mudflation.

Low security status needs a major penalty that can't be avoided with alts or second accounts. Gate guns need to be about quadrupled in damage wise. There needs to be more entrances to low-sec as well.


Originally by: Voith
Docking, at least in 0.0 can carry a risk. You can find yourself unable to use station services if the station changes hands.


Please keep up oh and...

Originally by: Voith
L2Read.

Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.

heheheh
Phoenix Club
Posted - 2010.08.03 15:50:00 - [401]
 

Edited by: heheheh on 03/08/2010 15:52:44
Another age old crappy argument.
If you are scared of that guy cloaked in YOUR system, then the problem is no ones but you own.
hell im tempted to make a gang and go afk there just reading this.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2010.08.03 16:50:00 - [402]
 

Edited by: Joe Starbreaker on 03/08/2010 16:51:19
Y'all should have figured out Voith was a troll back on page 8 when he declined to grapple with the "challenge" I posed (Scenario 1 vs Scenario 2). Despite his being painfully irritating, I'm inclined to give him some points for dragging all of you along for several pages after the apparently-genuine cowardly nullbears like Mackenna stopped posting.

EDIT: I see mackenna is indeed on the current page, but my point about being trolled is still accurate.

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 16:56:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Quixis
Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Quixis
I do like your ideas on low sec and that being docked is risky, it shows me just how special you are.

Low sec isn't, Nullsec is. You can easily lose access to fitting service and clone service if the station changes hands.

L2Read.


*cough* Did I say docking was related to low sec, erm no. Lets see what I was referring too shall we.

Originally by: Voith
Low Sec is going to suck until CCP adjusts it for 5+ years of mudflation.

Low security status needs a major penalty that can't be avoided with alts or second accounts. Gate guns need to be about quadrupled in damage wise. There needs to be more entrances to low-sec as well.


Originally by: Voith
Docking, at least in 0.0 can carry a risk. You can find yourself unable to use station services if the station changes hands.


Please keep up oh and...

Originally by: Voith
L2Read.

Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.



Subordinate clause, l2english.

Yes, low sec is ****, because there are too many hunters and not enough hunted. If you changed the mechanics to decrease the number of hunters you would increase the people ISKing there. Thus giving an advantage to the Hunters since there would actually be targets.

This would then make low sec not the least densely populated space in Eve. Which is why I call it a failure.

But I can see that you are simply trying to kill PvP, which makes sense for a horrible player. The first thing you do anytime someone suggests a change is scream how it will kill PvP, because despite your protests that is what you want.

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 17:05:00 - [404]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Edited by: Joe Starbreaker on 03/08/2010 16:51:19
Y'all should have figured out Voith was a troll back on page 8 when he declined to grapple with the "challenge" I posed (Scenario 1 vs Scenario 2). Despite his being painfully irritating, I'm inclined to give him some points for dragging all of you along for several pages after the apparently-genuine cowardly nullbears like Mackenna stopped posting.

EDIT: I see mackenna is indeed on the current page, but my point about being trolled is still accurate.

Amusing how in 8+ pages of being trolled they still don't have a coherent argument!
They go from one to another to another badly thought out idea. They don't have any real reason for opposing the change other than change = BAD.

Quixis
Posted - 2010.08.03 17:18:00 - [405]
 

Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Voith
L2Read.
Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.

Subordinate clause, l2english.


This is like watching a moth, beat itself to death on a light bulb.
You get the forums special 'moth of the month' award. Laughing

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 17:40:00 - [406]
 

Originally by: Quixis
Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Voith
L2Read.
Originally by: Voith
Way to walk right into that one chump.

Subordinate clause, l2english.


This is like watching a moth, beat itself to death on a light bulb.
You get the forums special 'moth of the month' award. Laughing


You're taking victory in being trolled.

I'm starting to think you are as dumb as I said you where.

Quixis
Posted - 2010.08.03 18:06:00 - [407]
 

Originally by: Voith
You're taking victory in being trolled.

I'm starting to think you are as dumb as I said you where.


You're trying too hard, my little special moth. Laughing

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.03 18:14:00 - [408]
 

Originally by: Quixis
Originally by: Voith
You're taking victory in being trolled.

I'm starting to think you are as dumb as I said you where.


You're trying too hard, my little special moth. Laughing

Rite.

Lia'Vael
Caldari
Migrant Fleet
Posted - 2010.08.03 21:56:00 - [409]
 

Originally by: Lia'Vael
Edited by: Lia''Vael on 03/08/2010 10:28:03
Hey Quixis, enjoying the lack of logic from Voith? Once he realizes he has nothing he'll leave again, although when he came back I was surprised he seemed to have put a little effort in his argument.

Anyways going back on the topic of AFK cloakers (ooh so scawy boo hoo). Every single person with an ounce of intelligence would realize the first step of killing off AFK (It stands of Away From Keyboard by the way) is to implement inactivity timeout. Since the subject matter should be AFK not the cloak.

On the topic of Local as a tool, Hmm let me look at it here with my glasses, oh it looks like it is meant as a chat. Local as it stands gives a lot of information, anyone with half a brain can gather quite a bit of information. Wormholes are in no way a comparison to what a world without local would look like, what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0.

If local gets changed I would definitely get behind a possible cloak change and cloak specialized ship change. But those that are dependent on local intel wont give it up without a fight (and they'll be kicking and screaming all along the way too). But to be honest its not needed, the resources and time CCP would spend are better used on something that does need fixing/polish.

On the note of Voith, read up on some of his past posts, they do get pretty funny.
*cough*
Originally by: Voith
When I rat I rat in a system so in the middle of no where I don't even see blues there. So I'm not really effected by "AFK Cloaking".


P.S. Voith, where is my rightly deserved Camembert!?

EDIT: Oh yes I forgot my almighty title, WoW-Tard #1. Suck it other WoW/EVE players.


Originally by: Voith

Not all of us can play a game, post of the forums and write Mass Effect slashfic all day!


Right out of the gate you just prove you have no viable ground to stand on.
Originally by: Voith

Please point out any logical inconsistencies that you have found in my posts. Ohh, wait you can't. But you're too dumb to realize that if you just had an inactivity time out everyone would just download autoscript.

Aww you're so dense you dont see your own failings, how endearing.

EVE® Online
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT(EULA)
7. CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct
3. You may not use macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.

Originally by: Voith

Oh, nose you won't go to local free space because it is dangerous!

logical inconsistency! Also you didn't pay attention to anything I said.

Originally by: Voith

This is all I really need to do to laugh at you every time you post.
"what with the greater amount of dangers inherent with wormholes compared to 0.0."
u skeered?

Wormholes are fun precisely because of the logistical danger, its something a 0.0 local intel carebear nub like you would never experience.
Originally by: Voith

That really is the problem isn't it? You're a horrible player, so even though CCP removed local from 2500 systems with no local you are too frightened of a bit of risk to actually take advantage of the it.

See above noobsauce

Originally by: Voith

Oh no there is risk!

Which is the real reason why you dislike the idea of cloaks being probable. You want risk free gameplay.

From the looks of it you didn't even read my post.

Theres at least three logical inconsistencies in this one post that you made because you fail at reading. Voith you just proved you're an idiot.

Now my Camembert and HTFU
Originally by: Voith
Oh look, WoW-Tard #1 finally speaks.

You still dont even have an arguement

Amda Tori
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.08.04 01:06:00 - [410]
 

The only way i can think of, about fixing the afk covops, is for the CovOps Cloaking device to have a really long cycle ( somehting like 30 min ) and a 5-10minutes cooldown or 30 minutes cooldown.
This way you can risk to be probed out, if you're not there to activate the module ( but macros can come into play :( )

Shaderfox
Posted - 2010.08.04 05:25:00 - [411]
 

As far as I'm concerned, it is a problem.

I have an alt in a covertops in a random alliances system. He's been in there for nearly a week afk, and has a covertcyno fitted, with enough fuel for 10. And another character within range with a Blackops

Without any warning, I could bridge 20 bombers on top of whoever I wanted, in that system. Don't know when, or where. Despite that incredible power, my covertops is unkillable. It sits in a safespot 23/7 cloaked up, while I'm not at the keyboard, and when I am.

When I'm not at my computer, I'm still a potential threat, because unless they know when I work/sleep, I could be there and watching. AFK and unkillable, in a ship that can kill anything I want on a whim. Only reason that nobodies died? They've abandoned the system.

Yes, I'm an alt, rather not let targets know what's what

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.04 05:46:00 - [412]
 

Originally by: Lia'Vael
Idiocy


CCP enforce macro bans?

You need to go into comedy.

Lia'Vael
Caldari
Migrant Fleet
Posted - 2010.08.04 07:02:00 - [413]
 

Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Lia'Vael
Idiocy


CCP enforce macro bans?

You need to go into comedy.



Aw done already? No ground to stand on? Go back to the nether and think of a new failure of a plot and bring me back some Camembert or dont come back at all my child.

~ WoW-Tard #1(NUMBER 1!)

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2010.08.04 08:26:00 - [414]
 

Originally by: Shaderfox
As far as I'm concerned, it is a problem.

I have an alt in a covertops in a random alliances system. He's been in there for nearly a week afk, and has a covertcyno fitted, with enough fuel for 10. And another character within range with a Blackops

Without any warning, I could bridge 20 bombers on top of whoever I wanted, in that system. Don't know when, or where. Despite that incredible power, my covertops is unkillable. It sits in a safespot 23/7 cloaked up, while I'm not at the keyboard, and when I am.

When I'm not at my computer, I'm still a potential threat, because unless they know when I work/sleep, I could be there and watching. AFK and unkillable, in a ship that can kill anything I want on a whim. Only reason that nobodies died? They've abandoned the system.

Yes, I'm an alt, rather not let targets know what's what


yeah, this is how the game is played.
I've got a falcon with 2 cynos on it in a hostile system, they stopped any activities there too, its hilarious how they p*ss their pants :-D

Quixis
Posted - 2010.08.04 09:21:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: Lia'Vael
Hey Quixis, enjoying the lack of logic from Voith?


I think it's moved to a game of 'last word' for him. Laughing

Mackenna
Amarr
GREY COUNCIL
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.08.04 14:23:00 - [416]
 

Edited by: Mackenna on 04/08/2010 14:24:43
Originally by: Robert Caldera

yeah, this is how the game is played.
I've got a falcon with 2 cynos on it in a hostile system, they stopped any activities there too, its hilarious how they p*ss their pants :-D


I hate to break this to you, but no one is ****ing their pants.

No one is running away from you in fear.

You're practicing consensual PvP.

Don't believe me? Show up today in a non-cloaking drake instead of a covert ops and see what happens.

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.04 15:38:00 - [417]
 

Originally by: Lia'Vael
Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Lia'Vael
Idiocy


CCP enforce macro bans?

You need to go into comedy.



Aw done already? No ground to stand on? Go back to the nether and think of a new failure of a plot and bring me back some Camembert or dont come back at all my child.

~ WoW-Tard #1(NUMBER 1!)

Better idea, why don't you bring me a reason AFK Cloaking should stay in the game.

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.04 15:46:00 - [418]
 

Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Lia'Vael
Originally by: Voith
Originally by: Lia'Vael
Idiocy


CCP enforce macro bans?

You need to go into comedy.



Aw done already? No ground to stand on? Go back to the nether and think of a new failure of a plot and bring me back some Camembert or dont come back at all my child.

~ WoW-Tard #1(NUMBER 1!)

Better idea, why don't you bring me a reason AFK Cloaking should stay in the game.


Oh wait there isn't one that doesn't involve you being all "sckeered" of wormholes.

Rite, sorry about that.

Valadeya uthanaras
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.08.04 16:18:00 - [419]
 

Originally by: Voith
Better idea, why don't you bring me a reason AFK Cloaking should stay in the game.


Because at the moment, its the only tactic available to small entity to disrupt the operation of larger entity on a daily basis without the larger entity being able to simply and mindlessly blob out the agressor.

This is because the defender can either: dock into invulnerability and/or pos into invulnerability, and wait until they have such massive numbers that they can engage with total safety.

This is because they know as soon as someone is near or in their system because of local intel(other mean of intel gathering are no longuer used and camps are now almost non-existant)and therefore can easely be garanteed almost 100% safety, because as long as their is "no hostile" in system, its almost 100% safe

AFK cloaking allow the agressor to reduce the effectiveness of local inteligence and this is reason alone to keep it in game, because matter of fact, its the only counter to local intel



An exemple, we formed a small alliance and disrupted by conventional mean an alliance called Black Star Alliance, at one point, they simply stopped to undock/bother until they had 4 to 5 times our numbers, including the intervention of 6 more allianceRolling Eyes. They used local intel to such extent that they knew when we were enterring their constellation from any direction or by any method to the point it was near impossible to catch anything

to counter this extensive use of local, we had a few people train for covert cyno and cloak to park them into their system entire day long, in the hope some would make themselve available to fight without the easy number game advantage that local gave them, and thus started to use AFK cloaking as a mean to get possible fight without being instantly seen and mindlessly overblobed


at one point , they started to park their afk cloaker in our home system, to deteck when we undocked our black ops / stealth bomber for a hot-drop ... which was fair game and very funny Very Happy, meaning that instead of using effortless local intel, they started to use " pilot" intel to detect our stuff and made the game more interresting, I think for both side ( they had the thrill of not knowing exactly were we would drop with our overpriced black ops, we had the thrill of not being sure what was bait, how would be response time and so on ...)


So reason to keep afk cloaker:

Reduce the effectiveness of local intel
promote the use of other mean of intel gathering
reduce the usage of macro and afk miner/ratter
promote teamwork and tactic developement on both side
give small entity a mean to disrupt operation of a larger entity with reduced blobing
give more use to black ops
promote 0.0 fear , instead of a mindless local-intel carebearland
and many more ...


oh and btw, CCP discused with CMS of a delay to loacal intel that could be modified with sov level and sov upgrade, http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wild_0.0_%28CSM%29

the current usage of local as an intel tool was NOT an intended function, but not wanting to change thing too drasticly, CCP will probably come with a elegent delayed systemVery Happy

hope this help

Valadeya

Voith
Posted - 2010.08.04 16:22:00 - [420]
 

Originally by: Valadeya uthanaras
Originally by: Voith
Better idea, why don't you bring me a reason AFK Cloaking should stay in the game.


Because at the moment, its the only tactic available to small entity to disrupt the operation of larger entity on a daily basis without the larger entity being able to simply and mindlessly blob out the agressor.

This is because the defender can either: dock into invulnerability and/or pos into invulnerability, and wait until they have such massive numbers that they can engage with total safety.

This is because they know as soon as someone is near or in their system because of local intel(other mean of intel gathering are no longuer used and camps are now almost non-existant)and therefore can easely be garanteed almost 100% safety, because as long as their is "no hostile" in system, its almost 100% safe

AFK cloaking allow the agressor to reduce the effectiveness of local inteligence and this is reason alone to keep it in game, because matter of fact, its the only counter to local intel



An exemple, we formed a small alliance and disrupted by conventional mean an alliance called Black Star Alliance, at one point, they simply stopped to undock/bother until they had 4 to 5 times our numbers, including the intervention of 6 more allianceRolling Eyes. They used local intel to such extent that they knew when we were enterring their constellation from any direction or by any method to the point it was near impossible to catch anything

to counter this extensive use of local, we had a few people train for covert cyno and cloak to park them into their system entire day long, in the hope some would make themselve available to fight without the easy number game advantage that local gave them, and thus started to use AFK cloaking as a mean to get possible fight without being instantly seen and mindlessly overblobed


at one point , they started to park their afk cloaker in our home system, to deteck when we undocked our black ops / stealth bomber for a hot-drop ... which was fair game and very funny Very Happy, meaning that instead of using effortless local intel, they started to use " pilot" intel to detect our stuff and made the game more interresting, I think for both side ( they had the thrill of not knowing exactly were we would drop with our overpriced black ops, we had the thrill of not being sure what was bait, how would be response time and so on ...)


So reason to keep afk cloaker:

Reduce the effectiveness of local intel
promote the use of other mean of intel gathering
reduce the usage of macro and afk miner/ratter
promote teamwork and tactic developement on both side
give small entity a mean to disrupt operation of a larger entity with reduced blobing
give more use to black ops
promote 0.0 fear , instead of a mindless local-intel carebearland
and many more ...


oh and btw, CCP discused with CMS of a delay to loacal intel that could be modified with sov level and sov upgrade, http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wild_0.0_%28CSM%29

the current usage of local as an intel tool was NOT an intended function, but not wanting to change thing too drasticly, CCP will probably come with a elegent delayed systemVery Happy

hope this help

Valadeya


Right, I forgot the obvious "Because you're horrible players" angle.

If you want local free blob free gameplay go to a wormhole.


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 : last (16)

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