Wrong, before you post ■■■■■■■■ you should educate yourself.
It absolutely is about your renter trash alliance because the only reason you feel that cloaking is overpowered is that you are weak. Better alliances look at an AFK cloaker, laugh, and wonder why all the renter trash are getting so upset about something so easily ignored.
How’s my favourite botting/RMT crowd doing today? 
2 Likes
we are great thanks! and yourself?
Well, I could do better but I’ll survive. 
Would you believe me if I told you many players multi-box mine and RAT sitting at keyboard without BOTs and without selling their stuff RMT?
Kinda goes without saying that 3rd party tech full auto AFK automated income needs to go.
The defense of AFK Cloaky’s is they are mechanics neutral, they do not earn ISK. The clap back is that those against them are risk averse. Why should an AFK cloaky be risk free 23/7 when the argument is ratters and miners should NOT be risk free.
All I ask is some chances to find and kill the AFK cloaky same as anyone else would kill an AFK ratter or miner.
You can’t do this without making null too safe.
Afk cloaking is only effective because you don’t know if the cloaker is active or not. If you knew he was active, you’d know not to rat. If you knew he was inactive you’d know you could rat safely. Both of these situations are unacceptable. You must not be able to find out if hes active or not.
If you have a tool that can find an afk cloaker, all you need to do is use it and either: A) catch the cloaker cause he’s afk and kill him. Thus clearing local and making the system 100% safe (unacceptable). Or B) have difficulty finding him because he’s active and evading you, thus discovering that he is not afk and that you should not risk your bling ratting ship (again unacceptable).
The only solution to the ‘problem’ is changing local so that you don’t know whether a cloaker is there or not in the first place. Only then can we discuss ways of finding cloaked ships.
That’s nice. That’s why I say “bots and bot-like players”. The non-bot multiboxers are still playing like bots, mindlessly farming 23/7 and docking up whenever a potential threat enters local instead of having an active PvP defense fleet to counter the threat.
Why should an AFK cloaky be risk free 23/7 when the argument is ratters and miners should NOT be risk free.
Because the renter trash farmers are making obscene amounts of ISK, while the AFK cloaked ship is just sitting there idle in a safespot. Of course one of these should be much riskier than the other.
All I ask is some chances to find and kill the AFK cloaky same as anyone else would kill an AFK ratter or miner.
You are not going to get that chance, ever. Any mechanic that allows you to find and engage a cloaked ship will simply result in everyone being forced to log off when they go AFK. This makes local a more effective intel tool for avoiding PvP but does absolutely nothing to give you a chance to kill the cloaked threat.
Besides that you are afraid to undock your bots, why do you care?
And don’t tell me you want to hunt them, that is just a years old ■■■■■■■■ line used by care bears to seem tough.
Appreciate your NON BIASED response. Apparently multi-boxing players who rent space bring shame to the game, at least in in your opinion.
1 Like
Really?!! Ability to attack an inactive cloaky suddenly makes Null ‘Too Safe’?
1 Like
Are you guys that afraid of losing a 70m VNI (when it can easily pay for itself back several times over within a day) that you’re this scared of someone being cloaked up?
Why does no one respond to the question? All I get are irrelevant deflections. Its not about what you may lose, its not about making isk, its not about safety either. The question is about play balance.
If you auto pilot, or go afk in any activity your risk should increase no matter what the activity is. In all cases save one it does go up dramatically. Why do you get a complete pass for cloaking? Why the Ardent defense of that one AFK activity?
Any ship uncloaked just sitting AFK has no more impact in the space, makes no more isk and has no afffect on gameplay mechanics than another ship doing the same while cloaked. Obviously the uncloaked ship can be immediately probed, found and destroyed or if near a celestial, rats can attack it hence the dramatically increased risk while AFK.
There should be some risk associated with ALL AFK activity. For AFK Cloaking there could be some event triggered at some random time that may cause the cloaked ship to decloak. Something easily avoidable by a an actively piloted ship. Basically the cloaky camper could still be AFK but runs the risk of exposure. The event may happen and still NOT decloak the ship. The risk should still be there none the less.
2 Likes
But why?
“The question is about play balance.”
But… why?
There already is a “balance.” The ship is AFK, and cannot interact with you. There you go. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an AFK ship hunt down a VNI. So it’s already balanced that way.
One minor correction to “ALL AFK” I don’t think being docked should have a risk.
There is NOT a play balance.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen an Uncloaked AFK ship hunt down a VNI. It however is at risk of being discovered.
Yes, and there is a module that helps alleviate that risk. It is called a cloaking device.
It was the choice of the non-cloaked pilot to not fit that module onto their ship. I don’t think it’s okay to punish a player who does take the steps to fit that module onto their ship and go “whoops! I know you took all the steps to avoid that, but because some people’s feelings are hurt, we’re going to prevent you from utilizing it!”
Module selection and ‘feelings’ are just more deflection. The global question is simply about AFK activity.
1 Like
Now you’re just dodging the issue and projecting that claim of “deflection.”
But I’l humor you, If the issue is really about AFK activity in general, what’s wrong with it?