As much as I try to explain otherwise, if you wish to sustain this counter argument, it helps to be accurate. Since you’re way off the mark I’ll leave you be, since your only argument against any cloaking adjustment is “But RMT”
You won’t because you’ve already lost the argument, while pointing to frivolous ideas and wild accusations. But if you don’t reply, how will you guys silence anyone trying to discuss anything involving cloaking if you don’t rush in to throw some trash at them?
It would be slow heat. as in maybe 30 minutes to an hour of being cloaked before enough heat is accumulated to start doing modual damage. T3 cruisers would be ideal for this purpose.
If you need to follow someone for more than 30 minutes to an hour, I’m not sure it needs to be done alone.
I don’t recall players having dozens of alts that they used to cloaky camp systems for isk 16 years ago, or the many other changes to the game and what players are doing. Unchecked player behavior and activity that ends up causing issues is normally worth taking a closer look at before it drives player count down.
It is time to suck it up, you babies are too safe being perfectly safe out in space while cloaked. I’m glad you agree.
You can just look at the regular posters in this thread and their word-for-word responses, arguments, attacks and reasoning that they repeat like broken records. It’s hard to take them seriously, after all they couldn’t be that dense, could they?
It’s entirely accurate. Your words say “more PvP”, but the obvious consequences of all of your proposals involve no increase in PvP and massive increases to the effectiveness of RMT botting. Since this fact has been explained to you over and over again you can no longer plead ignorance, and the only explanation for your behavior is that your goal is a buff to RMT botting and your discussion of PvP is just an attempt to bait people into agreeing with your suggestions.
I’m on your side that I too think that CCP shouldn’t nerf cloaks while keeping local, as it would likely lead to safer space with less PvP as a consequence.
However, I honestly think bringing RMT and botting into this is a terrible argument. And somehow I see this deflection of ‘but RMT botting!’ used a lot of times in this thread.
I enjoy seeing the good arguments for and against AFK cloaking, but these specific arguments appear to be just an attempt at derailing the thread. Yes, RMT is bad. Yes, botting is bad. And CCP should do something about it. But we’re discussing something completely different here, namely AFK cloaking. Sure, AFK cloaking may have effect on those other two issues, but everything in EVE has an effect on other things in EVE to a certain degree since it’s all one big server.
So please, stop bringing RMT and botting into this discussion. Create or find a new thread if you’d like to address those issues.
It does however not address my issue with AFK cloaking, which is that I believe that players should not have an effect on the game while AFK without extra risks for being AFK. I’d like to see more interaction, more risks. Make it worthwile to pay attention to the screen.
You may be right. People have tried before to claim that AFK cloakers do not have an effect on the game as response to my point. I guess this post does indeed cover all of this thread then.
I still believe AFK cloaking needs to be addressed though.
You’re not much into metagaming are you? There is far more to EvE than what happens while you are actively engaged with the client.
I have started wars, gotten nullsec ratters with loose lips blapped, caused a few (minor) market bubbles, and tricked haulers into flying into traps, simply by creatively posting on the forums.
When a player can produce real, tangible, in-game events using forum-fu, without even being logged into the client at all, your concern about logged in players having tangible, in-game impacts with little risk seems rather trivial…
EDIT: And yes, I realize that all of the examples I listed above invovled someone being logged into the client doing something. My point is that metagaming is real, and being at the keyboard in your pod isn’t required to influence the New Eden.
And I agree. I don’t necessily think that the cloaking module needs a change to address AFK cloaking, changing the local chat mechanics is a valid option as well. Without local chat there would be no use for AFK cloaking at all.
We aren’t discussing something completely different, because the motivation of certain people on the anti-cloaking side is blatantly to buff their RMT farms. We can not have an honest discussion of the subject while pretending that a desire for better RMT botting is not a factor.
Different desires surely are a factor for this discussion, but let’s focus on the arguments of these so called ‘RMT botters’ and attack the arguments instead of the person who says it?
Anyway, Extended cloaking should generate minor amounts of heat, which will end up causing heat damage to mods for those that choose to cloak for extended amounts of times when they could simply log off safely. This will promote active cloaking activities while making it harder to passively afk and gain a benefit, as you risk your ship. A cloak shouldn’t be able to be activated if it has any damage, requiring the use of nanite paste. This limits how long someone can achieve invulnerability in space.
If CCP wanted to stop that, they would. They have the information, the tools, and the resources to make botting impossible. Someone made a reddit post about how you could pull ESI data and find botters. CCP can do that to.
I just want a little danger added to the cloak. The cloaky doesn’t stop botters at all, and it’s not the players job to police the game.
Let me have a higher chance to find and shoot a cloaked ship. Let the risk be added. If you really give a ■■■■ about botting and RMT, you’d be pressing CCP about it.
Instead, you’re here, trolling the afk cloaky thread. You can’t fool me.
I am attacking the argument. The argument is “buff RMT botters”, and I am attacking its obvious flaws.
Well, at least now you finally admit that your goal is to get people to log off instead of staying logged in and cloaked, not to create additional PvP.
Let me have a higher chance to find and shoot a cloaked ship.
If this is genuinely your goal then why do you keep proposing ideas that will not allow you to find or shoot a cloaked ship, and will do little more than make local a more effective tool for avoiding PvP?
What amount of time are you suggesting with this idea? Because there are active cloakers who can spend hours stalking their prey, and if this heat buildup is less than that, then you have just ruined that playstyle. Also active cloakerw who want to sneak deep into enemy territory or WK space for extended periods would be hella-nerfed by this suggestion.
Again we see, it always seems to be ideas that nerf cloaking as a whole, while claiming its because ‘AFK Cloaking is Bad’.
I haven’t seen anyone say ‘buff RMT botters’ but you in this thread. Sure, it’s 4839 posts long by now and I may have missed it… but please don’t start creating and using the straw man fallacy.
If your cloaker, once back at the keyboard, can catch someone just because you’ve been in system AFK for the previous 10 hours, that catch is a result of AFK cloaking. If you wouldn’t get the kill if you had not logged in 10 hours before to make people stop attention to your face in local, AFK cloaking gave you that benefit. Same for intel.
Good idea, it’s something I do intend to do once I can fly a few more types of ships effectively on this character and have more time available. For now I’m happy to experience some more big battles in null.
