No you don’t.
An invisible man, with invisible eyes, is blind.
Good thing that the sensors inside a cloaked ship aren’t purely optical.
It doesn’t matter what its based on. If your cloak hides you from others’ sensors, its also a barrier to your own. Like when another ship cloaks, its undetectable to your sensors. It’s the same sensor tech and same cloak tech. Your own sensors shouldn’t be impervious to your own cloak.
If it is based on physics, either:
Sensors outside cloak barrier: Not a 100% cloak, not 100% undetectable, you have perfect sensors.
Everything inside cloak barrier: A 100% cloak, 100% undetectable, 100% blind.
I’m only asking for a compromise between the two.
Cloaks hide from the overview. The overview works perfectly to show other ships, whether you are cloaked or otherwise.
Your logic does not go up there either.
Combat recons are immune to dscan. They have a perfectly accurate dscanner despite being hidden to it.
Your logic does not go up there either.
So why should specifically the dscan of a cloaked ship be nerfed? It would be inconsistent with other game mechanics and also has no game balance reason, because I have yet to hear a good gameplay reason why cloaked ship sensors are too powerful that they need a nerf, when their dscan is only just as accurate as any other ship in the game from pods, shuttles to titans.
Why nerf the dscan of cloaked ships?
1 Like
That is different. They’re not hidden in the overview. They can be combat probed. That’s more a B-2 stealth bomber being invisible to radar in the real world. That’s not a cloaking barrier.
If we’re to hold to physics, then yeah, it would be blind to the overview too. But that’s obviously not playable.
You use cloaked ships, I use cloaked ships. We all use cloaked ships. Why? Because there’s an obvious huge advantage to it, and no downside except for the targetting delay. I have given you gameplay reasons in a previous response:
I get that you disagree, I get that it is because it would affect your gameplay negatively. That’s a subjective response, and it seems I am the only one who is trying to be objective about it.
Since I have answered your questions, please respond to my question to you:
There are various downsides to cloaked ships.
They’re weaker in combat than their non-cloaked versions, so you need to use those cloaks to avoid combat or only pick combat where you are in an advantageous position which, considering the covops ships are generally weak, is harder to find than in non-cloaked ships.
1 Like
and the not being able to target anything when cloaked, and the not being able to run modules like mwd, armour rep etc. when cloaked, and the speed penalty, and the fact that there are only so many cloaky ships and they tend to have less tank and firepower than uncloaky ships.
Probably more I forgot.
1 Like
And that is why none of the other downsides mean anything.
So is this a “nerf cloaked ships” thread?
What exactly is problematic about the cloaked ship balance in the game?
What are your experiences? What kind of situation do you think is a problem and how is your proposed change meant to change that situation?
No, it’s not simply a “Nerf Cloaked Ships” thread.
It’s an “Imperfect Sensors” thread, that gives different people in different ships potential discrepencies in their own capabilities.
A cloaked/untrained hauler trying to check if a gate is truly clear. You’re spending time. Time is an advantage. It gives lazy haulers more potential mistakes to make.
A hunter in a wormhole, waiting for prey to decloak at an anomaly. Can see he is not alone, but will take time to find the location of the prey. Can’t just sit in any random safe, would have to be one that separates the anomalies well. More potential for mistakes.
Someone uncloaked sitting in a safe, may get a little more time before they are discovered. DSCAN may not be pointing the exact position to probe.
Someone with trained skills would have little inconvenience, someone with untrained skills would have a much harder time. The disparity in trained skills between people is the crux of it.
Currently. You almost instantly know where someone is if you can DSCAN them. You can call “too easy” a problem, too easy to evade, too easy to hunt, and everyone who enjoys that ease will complain if you think it needs changing.
I don’t know about you, but usually it takes me a few dscan passes with different distances and angles to find the right spot they are, whenever I see a ship on dscan and want to know how to get to them.
The only things dscan instantly provides is “is anyone visible within 14.3 AU of me right now” and “is anyone at that particular 5 degree line in space right now”.
This last one is good to check gates, or to verify the dscan result of a fleet member who already spent time and multiple dscan passes to find where some ship can be found in space.
You can however not instantly know where someone is with a single dscan unless you are very lucky to get them on the first hit with the right angle, right distance and happen to already have correctly guessed where they were.
If it is not a nerf cloaked ships thread, why is your thread specifically targeting cloaked ships with this nerf?
1 Like
Almost always, the person you’re hunting is at a known location, like an anomaly, or a mining belt. It’s is trivially easy to hold V and click on the anom/belt you’re in range of. It’s less than 10 seconds.
I have said many times now, how it ISN’T “specifically targeting cloaked ships”, its about skill disparity. With cloaked ships getting a stronger penalty, that’s because the cloak itself is already tilted too far in favour of the cloaked ship. That and perfect sensors THROUGH a cloaking barrier makes little sense.
Exactly how do you know the right location, like the anomaly or belt, to target without being there to see the ship you hunt on your overview?
Please describe the steps you would take to find a mining ship at asteroid belt 5 on dscan.
First off, I don’t actually understand your question.
You’re talking about overview, and I’m talking about DSCAN?
For a mining belt? Fly close, like the planet or even one of the belts. Set DSCAN to 5deg, V-click on the mining belts in the overview. You see mining ships in D-SCAN? They’re mining at that belt.
Similar to anoms, but they’re even easier because of 14.4AU range and better spread out.
So how many times do you have to use dscan to find the ship?
Is it once, and instantaneous like you said?
Your last answer shows you appear to know you need to scan all the individual belts in order to find which one contains a ship.
And you don’t even know there’s a ship there unless you dscanned at 360 degrees on long range in range of the belt a first time.
So you’re looking at many dscans to find that one ship already.
Why make this process more tedious?
1 Like
You think that’s tedious? It’s a few clicks, a few seconds? I think we may have different definitions of what tedious is. I never claimed a single scan, I never claimed “instant”, those are your strawmen. “Almost instant” as in “less than 10 seconds”. I also noticed you twice ignored my one and only question to you.
Scanning down signatures. That’s tedious. Skilling up for it, and equipping for it, makes it much less so.
There are similar skills and I would argue to keep things as they are, like I do now.
While in your proposed situation where these skills already existed there is no good reason to remove such skills, in the existing situation there also is no good reason to add such skills.
Sounds strange and contradictive? Then let me explain. I think it’s good that EVE has plenty of skills for players to train and invest in their characters. I also think there need to be enough of those skills, not too many, not too few. Too few skills is a problem, it means players run out of things to train. Too many skills also is a problem, it means players never get anywhere.
Now back to your example: to add skills for the directional scanner.
Sure, I am not against it in principle. I just think we can add such skills to many more things that currently do not require skills. Skills to speed up the undock, skills to jump star gates faster, skills to see further out on the overview. Then nerf all those speeds, and if you’ve trained all to 5 we’re back at the situation we’re now.
It could work.
I just don’t see the point. I’d like to see FCCP add interesting skills instead for new mechanics, rather than to nerf players and make existing mechanics suddenly less accessible unless we train new skills to negate a penalty that wasn’t there before.
That’s a big reason I am against this change, it’s because it feels like a pointless nerf of our performance.
But the pointlessness is just one aspect of your suggestion.
The other aspect is that you wish for it to nerf cloaked ships, for no other apparent reason than some misplaced ‘logic’ in a game where we may be flying spaceships but space isn’t behaving with much realistic logic at all:
Ships don’t have a maximum acceleration, they have maximum speeds. Planets may have an orbit around stars, but they don’t actually move. Space has an ‘upside’ and ‘down’ direction, etc. etc.
In other words, EVE isn’t built on entirely realistic logic, it is built on game design decisions.
With that in mind, why do you wish to nerf cloaked ships? Is there a gameplay reason cloaked ships deserve a nerf in the current state of the game and why this nerf?
I’m open for nerfs, but only if there is a good reason to nerf that aspect of the game. And you have yet to give a good reason.
1 Like