Main AFK cloaky thread

Sure. Pretty sure I mentioned that earlier. Not every aspect has to change. The consistency of such a thing is great and fine by me.

But others insisted there be risk, so I added risk.

What I quoted is NOT playing the game and everything else you said after that was totally unrelated to AFK and involves playing the game!

To be quite honest I don’t want to react to ghosts. Who does? Do you? I am here to play against players and the AI, not potentially waste time or make a bad decision because of a ghost.

I get the point that at present AFK cloaking is a way to combat botters (and maybe some other unwanted folks) but on other than that, why should active players have to suffer a ghost in system? Is that so great for EVE?

If you make a bad decision it’s your own fault. And you don’t know that the player was AFK, so what is your problem? Maybe they were active and you did exactly what you needed to do to survive.

Is that so great for EVE?

Not really, which is part of why CCP offered a solution that removed AFK cloaking entirely. But nullbear farmers rioted over the removal of local, so here we are. It’s not ideal but the only viable solution has been considered and rejected.

Here we go again. Look man, if you want to throw out any idea, no matter how appropriate it might be, you are welcome to do so.

Presumably people post in here with the overall goal of catching the eye of someone at CCP. If that is the case, something that will significantly change a gameplay mechanic really needs to be more than just a basic idea. It needs to solve a problem, or extend some functionality, etc.

Only if you are one of those types who believe words are violence. For the rest of us heated vigorous debate is the best way to percolate the best ideas to the surface.

1 Like

Very naive. I scanned Olmeca a few times on his logins (He was lazy and always started far too many clients to be able to cloak in time. :sweat_smile: ), he always positioned himself in the middle of the map/between the site spot areas, so he could just run a Dscan grabber. No local necessary.
Some of his alts were around the jump beacons at 15-20km too. So you could use Overview Alert. As I said, many solutions that do not need a local.

To that, you want to know the ship types to drop on it, so a local is no help.

Because cloaks are part of the game. Why should I suffer ships I can’t d-scan (combat recons) which could warp on me unannounced? Because they are part of the game. And they don’t have a targeting delay like a cloaky ship does.

Is that so bad? Honest question.

People get frustrated with the same old complaints and same old ideas, even when those ideas seem new. In reality while some of your ideas may seem new, or unique (and they may be unique) they are in fact pretty damn close to what has been offered up again and again.

You need to stop taking it so personal. Even if directed at you be like Elsa and “Let it go”. Only you can give them the power to piss you off. And if you’re taking part in the forum, throwing out ideas then you better read the responses. Otherwise say goodbye and leave. You are the one who posted your “ideas”. We are the ones who are debating them with you and pointing out their merits/flaws. If you can’t take criticism keep ypur fingers away from the keyboard.

Show the facts that AFK cloaking is a problem. And I will go out on a limb here and say that an inconvenience to someones game-play is not a problem. I know, I know…this is a place for “ideas”. But usually you come up with an idea to fix a problem or make something better (I.E. Fix a problem).

So here’s my idea. Instead of getting rid of local why not just remove players from local who are cloaked. When they decloak they show back up. When cloaked their name doesn’t show, but they do show in the count for local. So if there are 3 people in the local count, but you are the only name showing in chat, you know there are 2 people out there cloaking. But this is just a stupid idea which would improve nothing. Removing them from local completely would be a better idea. Kind of a “Wormhole Lite” local

1 Like

Left this rabbit hole for a bit to find this wonderful nugget. Always good to reread on occasion. Especially these little nuggets which seem to pertain somewhat to the issue some have with AFK cloaking: (I’ve highlighted the relevant points)

You consent to PvP when you click “undock”.

  • You are not safe in 1.0 security space. CONCORD is there to punish, not to protect. Get used to the idea.
  • In most cases, the only way to be 100% safe from aggression inside the game is to be docked in a station. Being cloaked in a secret safespot could work too.

Scamming and unethical behavior some would consider griefing is not only allowed, it is encouraged and rewarded by the game mechanics.

Unfair circumstances?

  • There is no such thing as “a fair fight” or “an unfair fight”. There’s only a fight. Circumstances are irrelevant.
  • Just because you can fly something doesn’t mean you should.

Yeah, exactly, that’s one of the counters that I remember posting somewhere months ago. We did eliminate a perma-cloaky that way in the B-W pocket in Provi. He had been there for many days, every day from dt to dt. We got him, we even reciprocated with cloaky campers in Catch at the time, just to make the message crystal clear (which is another counter, they were within portal range).

Nah, the appropriateness of “no local for the cloaky” depends more on the size of the system. If his only defense is dscan, and the system is large enough he can be blindsided, not knowing if he’s being hunted or by what. In small systems that would, as you highlighted, not work because of dscan. My initial thought was to not make the penalty on a cloaky too harsh, and take away only local. Of course, if one would take away dscan instead, then it’s as good as game over for the cloaky, he would not be able to do his job by staying AFK and would be slightly more vulnerable. So would disabling his cloak altogether, but that is a totally wrong avenue. Countering cloakies is and should be a game of wits. And cloakies are a necessary element in the biotope.

It’s more a question of an exchange in the sense of “wouldn’t it be fun for both sides if someone added this new element into the gameplay”. Sometimes it would, sometimes it wouldn’t, depending on view point or nature of the suggestion.

Fighting over ideas or suggestions is a bit silly, they should not be matters of personal pride. Anyone can toss out any suggestion I made, they carry no real weight in any case. Nor do anyone else’s…

Here’s a quote from a book I recently re-read, The Name of the Rose, by Eco. The author would have been a great EvE player:

But those were times when, to forget an evil world, grammarians took pleasure in abstruse questions. I was told that in that period, for fifteen days and fifteen nights, the rhetoricians Gabundus and Terentius argued on the vocative of “ego” and in the end they attacked each other, with weapons.

1 Like

Now I have a reason to go to Iceland! To watch all these people meet in person! :scream:

1 Like

I like how you’re thinking :sunglasses:

1 Like

I AFK cloak plenty.

Is it necessarily a huge problem that needs solved immediately cause its breaking EVE?

I don’t think so.

Is it cheesy in a way I would like to see disappear?

In my opinion, yes.

Will it be easy to change?

Obviously no.

Should we give up and decide it will be impossible to change for all time and must stay as is?

Again, obviously no.

Will other changes be desirable if AFK cloaking is changed somehow?

Most likely. So even more ideas can be talked about.

Will all this talk lead to nothing to matter how good some ideas are?

Most likely. So relax.

1 Like

Snapshot. To everyone’s horror he turns out to be back ATK, decloaked and attacking !! So he was a former AFK cloaker. Or was it a former cloaker only pretending to be AFK ? This game can be so confusing at times :grin:
Anyhooo, it was in reference to MB’s

which requires some activity, yes. I especially appreciated the

which for me is the real essence of the fun of (solo) cloaky hunting. Yeah, that’s not afk cloaking. We segued

That would do nothing.

The AFK tag would go away when the cyno popped or the attack starts.

In fact it would add a false sense of security, lets say it came on after 15 minutes. That doesn’t mean the player is not right there watching the screen, ready to pounce.

1 Like

Looking through this thread, it seems the Devs team from CCP cannot hear our voice due to players from the “free awards afk cloakly team” burying great ideas to help to resolve this issue. Gerard Amatin comment from May 11th 2020 is correct and I agree with his first paragraph. AFK cloakly campers are a real issue, it makes the game unbalanced which they take away the enjoyment from the game since there is nothing you can do to counter them. (And the new Abyssal weather is not a fix, it is a feature and has nothing to do to fix the balance of cloakly campers.) For example, there is an AFK Cloakly camper in a system, and they ask 5 bil isk per system for one month so they will leave the system alone. That is extortion and with that they can pay for the free Plex, skill injects and/or buy sub/cap ships for other new alts, at the same time other systems spreading that across New Eden. That just ruins the fun for everyone.

There are a few more ideas to help with the balance WITHOUT braking Black Ops ships (movement or mission). Please keep in mind when I say “period of time” or “over-time” I mean hours, like 3 - 5 hours or 2 – 4 hours (that is up to CCP).
Yes, having a new RSS probe that can scan down cloakly ships. The longer the ship stays in one spot or near the same place for a long period of time, the easier it is to find and scan them down. Think of it as a “radiation“ hotspot that continues to increase remains in the same area. However of course, that afk camper “could” just warp to other location in space but by doing so causes a spike in “radiation“ signature when they land, or it hold its “radiation“ hotspot to the new land location. To release the “radiation” hotspot is by de-cloaking and maybe having a penalty of some kind. Also, a safe log will not help to reduce penalty time or radiation.

Another idea is to have ship’s capacitor slowly drain, again over time. No matter how much you are cap stable or if you have a cap booster (after de-cloaking), you will not able to restore it till the penalty timer is over. You can call it “silent running” where the EMF from the capacitor can give out its location, and there should be a cool-down or penalty where you cannot cloak back immediately after de-cloaking.

My last idea is when you hold cloak (again, over a period), more radiation builds up within the ship and holds it. The more radiations build up the more damage it can do to your ship’s modules, either overheats your high slots or all your slots. By de-cloaking the radiation is released and again, a cool-down/penalty should be applied so the ship cannot cloak back immediately after de-cloaking.

In the end, cool-downs or penaltys should applied so the campers cannot cloak back immediately after, and gives the defenders a chance to even the playing field.

CCP I really to hope you are reading this message and I hope this is able to plant some doubts about AFK Campers and understand our annoyance from players like myself.

*removed political commentary. - ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

1 Like

I guarantee the devs have heard all of the arguments. They haven’t changed in over 10 years.

An AFK player needs no counter.

Your defense for anytime a player is in system is the same. Fly smart.

It doesn’t matter if it is a cloaky ship trying to get you directly. All except the paper thin stealth bomber is going to have at least a 5 second delay before they can even start targetting you. An aligned ship will warp instantly whether it is a frigate or a supercap.

Even if they are just going to warp in to light a cyno, Even the fastest players still take time. When the cyno goes up the ships need to right click and jump, and then load grid. An aligned ship will still warp away in time.

How do I know. I always fly aligned. I haven’t lost a PVE ship in forever, aside from my very early days. A combination of dscan and being aligned I have gotten away from numerous attempts over the years.

Removed previously deleted quote and reply. -ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

image

image

image

image

image

Every single one of your suggestions has already been discussed in this thread multiple times each.

4 Likes

This thread begins with a mention of observatory arrays which were meant to combat cloakers which is something CCP was seriously considering. Stop acting like CCP has never thought of changing this dynamic. They have and they have considered it quite seriously. We could debate until the cows come home why nothing has been implimented YET, but its quite enough that CCP has played with such ideas and we here in the idea section wish to continue having ideas.

I am sorry ideas are so very threatening to you. For the sake of your nerves you should probably just ignore this thread. Constant terror can lead to things like heart disease you know.

Just so I am completely clear. I do not think cloaky camping is a problem. I do not think it is cheating. I do believe it is a valid gameplay style and a highly effective form of psychological warfare. However, I do think AFK cloaky camping is a problem through the effective exploitation of an imbalanced mechanic; the perpetual input free cloak. I contend that it receive the same consideration and attention that many AFK ‘activities’ have as of late.

The attention generated by my reddit post on this subject has compelled me to take up the cause of bringing balance to the cloak. Not because I hate scarebears, or because I favor carebears, but because I am both, but favor neither. To quote Star Wars “Jedi and Sith wield the Ashla and Bogan. The light and the dark. I’m the one in the middle. The Bendu.

1 Like

Congratulations you have now broken all of Wormhole space.

Does this capacitor drain that overrides the cap-stability of a ship apply to all ships? or only the Cloaked Ship that you so much want to nerfed??? DO you think its fair that a non cloak ship can become cap-stable and run other modules indefinitely but a cloak shop cant???
You are also harming many cloak playstyles for at the computer players with this.

Again, you are just targeting a single module… What if I was to suggest that running your weapons over a period of time (without stopping for a cool-down) will cause them to jam/explode damaging your other module slots. Or shield hardners, or afterburners…

Again here you cause issues and nerfs to many ‘at computer’ cloaking playstyles, claiming it is because AFK is bad.


You have also failed to address the other side of the issue, Local.

Now if you had added “the cloaked vessel will not appear in local while cloak is active” with your ideas, they may have some merit and deserve some discussion.

damn. just shoot each other in game… :roll_eyes:

2 Likes

But… but… but… I’m cloaked! :scream:

2 Likes