Glad you could stop by! See you next time. Have fun being smug and superior on the WoW forums in the meantime. o/
And btw, they aren’t ignoring “their player base”, they’re ignoring a very vocal minority. Most people accept how Cloaks work, and learn to adapt. But some people would rather rat and mine in “perfect safety” and run, dock up, and hide if there’s a scary face in Local. And then post in this thread while they’re waiting for the Stranger Danger to go away.
Did you just say WoW. LOL
Please for the love of god man. Get out there and explore the world, I don’t even know if WoW still exists. Even the insults in this forum are the same. I feel like I stepped out of a time machine.
Maybe that’s why this problem still is around. Paste of change in this game is slower then you are.
Anyway. Time to get going. Life is short, waits for no man. Specially not for cloaky fixes.
fixed that for ya, mate. Ya’rr all shitters and the newbro argument is plain ol’ ■■■■■■■■ no matter which side it’s comin’ from. All newbros are seein’ is toxic jerks never stoppin’ talkin’ about the same ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ all the ■■■■■■■ time. Stop tellin’ yaself ya’rr any different, 'cause ya’rr not.
CCP stands by the mechanic as it exists now. They have explicitly stated that no changes will be made to cloaking until, at minimum, local is removed and replaced by the structure-based system they’ve been considering.
This thread exists to be a trash can for all of the anti-cloaking whines. Nobody from CCP ever reads it except to dump redundant threads in here, its sole purpose is to keep everything in one easily-ignored place instead of having RMTer whine threads cluttering up the forum and getting in the way of useful stuff. If CCP closed it with a statement of “cloaking is not changing, end of discussion” the RMTers would keep making whine posts anyway, except now there would be no single trash can to put them all into. Do not assume that continued discussion here means that CCP is still undecided.
Yeah of course that’s what you meant…
Not at all that you didn’t take into account how slots, speed and sig contribute to a ships tank. Cause you know, all pvp is done at point blank range in stationary and un fit ships…
Easily solved the tachyon array cannot be deployed in J space
You really are that stupid. Color me amazed. You’re literally trying to argue that I didn’t say something that I specifically stated because of some image you have in your head of how all T2 hulls should be.
When refering to T2 tank that only ever refers to the base resists of a hull -THAT- is the T2 tank. Other factors come into play when looking at total tank, but that’s not anything I ever claimed to not be true. In fact, I straight up pointed out that each hull was different and if you wanted to stick a hull into a situation it wasn’t designed for you were going to have to give up something in return to achieve it (giving up more slots to tank modules for example). Made worse by the fact that if you paid any attention you’d see while in the case of a bomber sig only goes up slightly in all cases (2m) from their base hull, they do typically have better fitting, and in all cases more raw HP on top of the T2 resists. The only factors that are reduced are speed and agility, which don’t matter all too much when you can cloak - it’s like that so there can be a chance to decloak and catch. I swear to god it’s as if you think if it doesn’t have the tank of an assault frigate or cruiser you think it’s worthless, yet ignore the fact that it uses battleship level weapons with a massive application bonus baked into the hull. How many people do you think are dropping bombers on frigates anyway?
Why am i even replying to this bait… good job. Might I suggest you go play the game and spend a little less time on the forums? Maybe then I wouldn’t need to explain terminology to you just so you can understand what was being said in the first place.
T2 resist profiles refer to assaults, t3’s recons, hictors, dictors, commands. The ships where there’s enough of it to make a difference. Not just anything that gets a slight bump. Interceptors and coverts aren’t referred to as having a t2 tank.
You clearly brought up the extra resists because you forgot they only get a tiny boost. And you also forgot that bombers don’t really have capabilities to really utilise these resists. After fitting, bombers will have the same or lower resists to t1 frigates, as well lower hp due to lack of slots/rigs AND take more damage due to low speed and high sig.
Yes you feel the difference with 10% bigger sig and -15% speed. It’s like giving your opponent a free damage mod but without the stacking penalties.
The irony in you telling others to play the game, when it seems you’ve never used a bomber yourself. If you had, you wouldn’t try to argue that it has any meaningful survivability except range and cloak. It’s a glass cannon!
Tradeoffs. You want agility/speed use your slots to gain it. You want tank, depending on what kind, give up your damage or utility for it. You’ll never be as good as an assault frigate, I’m sorry. That doesn’t make it worthless, just not optimal for that kind of use.
Tradeoffs. You don’t get to have the highest damage and all the tank.
I brought them up because a bonus is a bonus. Increased raw and resist profile is still a bonus. They get a far larger damage bonus than tank as a trade off compared to other hulls which got more tank than damage. I’m sorry you seem to think that I was just “covering” for myself despite bringing it up several times already that these smaller gains were the tradeoffs they got for their power and ability to cloak.
The speed and sig are hardly noticeable unless you’re taking on ships this thing was not meant to fight. You have a cloak, you get to choose what you engage meaning these drawbacks are basically nonexistent unless you actually decloak to fight faster and more agile frigates or nano cruisers. I’m honestly not even sure what scenario you’re considering them to be used in. So yes, I really do wonder if you play the game or make use of these hulls if you’re actually consider taking on ill-advised matchups when you are the one with the cloak.
Look at zkill, there are plenty of solo bomber kills out there where they gave up some utility and played at their strengths. These people understand the ship is not the be all end all of the frigate class yet still make heavy use of them. They are designed for hit and run, not stand and fight.
Exactly, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be fit in such a way that they don’t just fall over dead.
You mean thanks to their cloak. Not their ‘T2 tank’…glad you’ve given up on that idiocy. It’s pretty obvious you don’t get out much.
So it’s not noticeable unless it noticeable. You’re a genius.
I am honestly confused about what the point is here. Bombers, which do not have full T2 resists, have “T2 tank”? A slow frigate with near-zero fitting room after weapons is somehow able to be anything but an instant lossmail if it decloaks against anything that can fire back? I mean, yeah, I suppose a solo bomber can kill a RMT bot, but against a real PvP threat bombers are far weaker than their non-cloaking counterparts once the cloak is off and the shooting begins.
You really think that will happen at all?
Heh…excellent point. What about those 5,762,856,347,645,821,327 pilots that are going to cyno in and defeat whatever force you bring?
That is one of the usual talking points. That cyno has an infinite number of pilots behind it…which underscores the intellectual bankruptcy of those arguing against cloaks in general.
It’s very important that it be possible to disrupt peoples’ money-making in nullsec, and AFK cloaking is one of the most effective ways. We’re not worried about cloaked ships being overpowered because cloaked ships do very little DPS.
But we understand it has a pretty big psychological effect. We would like to make some changes…it may not be the changes people are expecting, though. For instance, I can tell you that AFK cloaking is not an issue in wormhole space and there are pretty good reasons for that.–CCP Fozzie
This has already been posted in this thread. There is also this thing called google. In fact, pretty sure it was in the old cloaking thread on previous incarnation of the forums.
You can listen here:
Of course I don’t. No more than I expect the afk cloaky camper to jump on the afk vni player.
We’ve talked about it in the past. I’m just against all forms of passive gamplay in all it’s forms and want to open up vulnerabilities in them to discourage it.
I’m not sure how much you remember since it’s been months at this point where we were discussing the possibilities the OA could bring to allow attackers to sneak in and whatnot. The chaos that could bring to everyday and wartime sov null, but with some aspects baked in for a certain amount of give and take via upgrades. In the current wartime meta the only option to play is not to play is not fun for either side and doesn’t make for good content. And to say psychological warfare in your game that makes your playerbase play something else rather than engaging was always a ridiculous comment from fozzie and should have gotten him reprimanded (exclude the fact that it was just funny when he said bombers had low damage). I even agree that camping is a perfectly valid hunting tactic over a few days, but when it stretches for months as it has in the north and south with no way to strike back something is horribly out of balance.
Like local? 
Yes, I’ll be curious about what the OA will do.
Naw this thread and others related to the OA and other issues people always seem to bring up.
I kinda took a break from the forums, too much of a headache for no meaningful results. Most everything devolves into an argument where people take polarized sides and nothing gets discussed or common ground reached. Closest thing I ever had was talking with you and a few others about OAs, capital balance passes, and fatigue. I can’t even remember the last time anything outside of the upcoming features page even got a CCP employee response that actually tried to add to a topic rather than just delete a few posts like glorified ISD members and disappear again.
I have read lots about cloaky camping the campers say it’s fine others don’t.
It’s interesting for the cloaky camper it is win win . You chose what you do there is no risk at all you camp you attack who you want you can hot drop who you want there is no risk of being caught even if AFK . The reply to this is all others are Care Bears and should just take risk while they take none . This is not a valid point so a single person with multiple accounts can shut down a whole region . There is no risk for them but anyone wishing to partake in any activity in the game could be popped at any moment . To me this makes it a little odd as the campers are taking no risk at all and then saying that those who don’t fly or leave stations because of this are weak . Basically cause and effect the camper has no risk and the non camper takes the risk or a getting dropped if they bring anything out that can fight. Or if they mine they will be destroyed by the camper . The camper needs no back up as they don’t have to do anything as there is no draw back for them this game dynamic I believe is set by ccp. As 1 you can’t make isk in the game at this point so the only way to replace ships is to by plex and spend money . Smart business for ccp but just crap over all A’s one person can set bots up and multiple alts with no risk so basically who is the carebear somone who will only attack if they know they can win with no loss . One reality of true life is there is always a risk when you go into battle eve has made this risk free for campers
Only if you never decloak to attack, in which case there is zero reward and risk vs. reward is balanced. If you want to accomplish anything (other than forcing RMT bots to dock) you have to decloak and accept the normal risks of PvP.
This is not a valid point so a single person with multiple accounts can shut down a whole region .
Only against RMT botters and renter trash.
Against competent players a single AFK cloaker can do nothing. The competent players are farming in groups of PvP-capable ships and any attempt by the lone AFK cloaker to do anything to attack them results in the farmers pressing F1 and getting a killmail. And should the AFK cloaker be dumb enough to cyno in more lossmails the farmers have their own capitals on standby for a counter-drop and free capital kills. The AFK cloaker is either ignored and useless or providing the useful service of bringing killmails to an alliance’s home system and saving them the effort of having to go out roaming to get killmails.
Against RMT botters and renter trash with the collective ability of a RMT bot AFK cloakers are effective. RMTers and renter trash fly PvE-only ships, have zero ability to fight in PvP, and refuse to group up into an effective defense because anything but solo farming is producing less ISK per hour. Their only possible defense is to stay docked at any time a non-blue name is in local. And yet they feel entitled to the theoretical maximum ISK/hour their rented system can produce, because they have leveled up their Ravens enough to beat the NPCs. The fact that EVE is a PvP game is terrifying and rage-inducing to them, all PvP threats must be removed and local must provide a 100%-accurate ability to opt out of PvP by docking.
The question now is why you want to introduce gameplay changes that have no effect on competent players and only provide more safety for RMT botters. Are you a RMT botter yourself, or do you just fail to understand the effects of your changes?
As 1 you can’t make isk in the game at this point so the only way to replace ships is to by plex and spend money .
No, you can’t make ISK. The rest of us can make plenty of it.
And do you honestly not see how your theory is obviously wrong? If there is no ability to make ISK then how are people able to afford to buy the PLEX you RMTed? Where is the PLEX buyer’s ISK coming from? Clearly some people are able to make lots of ISK, even if you can’t.
Hillarious how you can’t support your own position Merin.
Every single time you go straight to Ad Hominem. It’s all you have.
To someone camping under a cloak, no matter how deep in enemy territory, how many people are in system actively hunting you, regardless of any efforts put out to challenge you… You are 100% safe in open spece. Period. No contest whatsoever. So long as you are 2001 meters away from the nearest hunter, nothing can challenge you at all.
So you can’t make ISK under that cloak? So what, ISK isn’t the only thing of value in the game. Can you see the grid? Can you see the overview? Can you see local? Can you use Dscan? Can you use Probes? Seems like you can gather info like a MOFO. In all that info gathering, you can pick the perfect target at the perfect time, all with zero risk to yourself no matter how long it takes or how much opposing effort is put into preventing you from doing it.
You are at EVEN LESS RISK than the most paranoid of farmers because you are not even subject to random chance or error. You are perfectly 100% safe under that cloak. You don’t need to watch local or dscan to be safe. You don’t have to watch for probes or new arrivals or pay attention to intel channels, or stay aligned or anything else… all that while still remaining an active threat.
All of that and you cannot tolerate even the thought of the most mild of requirements to move around once in a while and be subject to any sort of countermeasure against your activity. You demand 100% safety with 100% effectiveness or else you just cry incessantly that someone not even in space with you might enjoy their gameplay without you there to personally ruin it for them.