CCP is not in that group. They have explicitly stated that they are not changing anything. This thread does not exist because they want proposals for changes, it exists so that anti-cloaking whines from renter trash don’t clutter up the forum.
It will go on forever because a problem has not been defined, that when drilled down on, has anything to do with cloaking.
A “fix” by definition needs a “problem”.
I’m afraid to undock is not a bonafide problem 
2 Likes
Just remove local and all problems will be solved )))))
If you cant see that cloaky loki in local, you wont worry so much about it.
2 Likes
I don’t know. I support the OA, and they pitched that themselves, though as with all things they are taking a very long time with it.
At the end of the day it’s allowed to go on because this game caters to griefers. The devs came from the ranks of griefers, and their interest lies in making eve ‘niche’ by allowing what would be grief play in literally every other game ever made not only sanctioned, but lauded and praised. They even redefined ‘grief play’ especially for eve so that the mouthbreathers who came here after being kicked out of everywhere else could say its not griefing. Except it is, no matter how much you laugh up your sleeve about it.
The winner of a legitimate PvP battle is a griefer?
Talk about being a sore loser!
2 Likes
Oh, the problem has been defined and drilled on ad nauseum.
It’s not that people are afraid to undock, it’s that the conditions of the module allow the cloaker a no lose scenario.
You don’t get to beat them, you just get to tolerate them.
IOW, you hate the founding principles of EVE that have been there since day one. EVE is clearly not the game for you, so why do you stay? Go back to WoW.
(Of course one can’t help thinking of the fact that RMT botters have a financial incentive to keep botting even if they don’t like the game.)
1 Like
He came from Star Wars, Voidstar is the name of a PvP instance in Star Wars.
I played the first version of Star Wars shortly after release way back in the day, but I didn’t know that. I"m not ‘from’ Star Wars, I"ve used this name for longer than the average EVE player has been alive, well before I was the age of the average eve player myself.
I don’t hate the founding principals of EVE. I hate what it’s become. If it hadn’t fostered having alts as the answer to everything and courted a toxic playerbase, the game would be much better than it is now.
No, just no and you have been told this before.
- Make friends, join a team
- If you can’t do #1 alts are a fallback.
LOL… Remember “Power of Two” promotions? They actively promoted alts for years.
Yes how awful of CCP to market to players who find alts handy. Those bastards! /sarcasm
2 Likes
Only against wimps like you that are incapable of shooting back.
Good luck shooting him if he just stays cloaked.
“but hur dur he isn’t doing anything then”
Yes he is, he is acting like a fleet in being. Protecting against the potential fleet they cyno in requires significant investment. An investment the cloaker makes necessary by it’s pure presence. The combination of the game mechanics of cloaking, local and cyno’s assures this. Forcing a defence fleet to guard against you is a form of opportunity cost. The person cloaking can’t lose while doing this.
But the other side needs a standby fleet as well. One that can be tracked and bombed. Sure, that afk t1 frig isn’t at risk, but the fleet that’s supposedly going to get cynodropped on you is.
I’m not entirely fond of the ability to keep cheap observatories wherever myself, but it’s not that magical.
Also, remove local from nullsec 2018.
And if he does so what?
Reading is that hard for you?
Reading it doesn’t make it true.
Got an answer to the question?
Why should null sec actually be safe?
If anything it is already too safe, keep cloaky camping or remove local! )))
1 Like
You are right, null sec shouldn’t be safe, that’s why a cloak shouldn’t give 100% invulnerability. It is basically the definition of safe.
And that’s why 100% accurate local information is dumb.
1 Like