I have no worries whatsoever of getting dropped on. I do not participate in any of these activities. But it is clear how unbalanced cloak is compared to anything else currently ingame.
So what? Why do you care so much that a player is sitting idle in space?
With the sole purpose to stop someones PVE activity.
Only if that person is too weak to do anything but hide in station if they donât have a 100% guarantee of safety via local showing no non-blue players.
Every single module has its ups and downs.
So does a cloak. It has massive penalties to scan resolution and a significant delay after decloaking before you can lock a target. And the ships that can fit a covert ops cloak have inherently reduced stats compared to their non-cloaking counterparts. Imagine if an armor plate had a penalty of -25% damage!
1 second to decloak, 1 second to activate the cyno, 1 second for the incoming ships to click âjumpâ, some time longer than 1 second for them to load the new system, 1 second to initiate a lock, 1 second to activate a warp disruptor. Thatâs a significant delay before any incoming ships can catch you, and the cyno ship is both immobile and unable to lock you for ~5 seconds unless itâs a paper tanked bomber.
Also, why are you solo farming? Why donât you have friends in PvP ships farming next to you, so that your combined fleet can overwhelm any attacker?
How is it âabusingâ a mechanic?
You can cloak. You can also just go AFK from the game.
Can you point out exactly where the âabuseâ is?
1 Like
So sorry, I had to run out to do some fun stuff with the family.
That is more a question for you. I have now pointed out multiple times that you have this backwards.
With your fuel proposal you are asking to drastically and fundamentally change how a module, which has been in the game for over a decade, works.
It is not MY job to say why that drastic change is good or bad, until YOU can first show why such a drastic change is necessary.
Neither you, or anyone else has sufficiently shown how this is such a HUGE âproblemâ that such a drastic change is necessary.
I have attempted to calculate how widespread this practice is (ie, seems pretty small). I offered that my calculations could be discounted. This was ignored or overlooked. Nothing has been offered to even attempt to show definitively that this practice is widespread and pervasive.
You even claimed we donât understand YOUR situation. I have followed up asking you to elaborate on your situation, as you gave no details.
If you cannot even get close to proving why your major module change is needed, I have no need or desire to argue the merits of such a change.
1 Like
It completely screws over wormholers who must be able to cloak for extremely long periods.
This point has been made multiple times.
Given almost a week to do so. This is not comparable.
No they donât.
Do they, though?
2 Likes
Maybe this should be the target of your nerf request then, rather than nerfing cloaks for every cloak user in the game.
Yes, but I would say itâs more accurate to say that itâs a problem with the confluence of all of these mechanics. If you change or take away any of them then the problem goes away, but the problem is that all of these mechanics have other effects and benefits, and if you take any of them away then there are knock-on effects that at least one group finds undesirable, and that are generally larger than the problem being solved here.
Case and point, the local blackout.
People wouldnât do it if it wasnât effective, and to a large extent this is exactly the goal of AFK cloaking. Get you to ignore them so that they can more easily set up a gank.
I mean, yes, just not to the same extent as smaller groups, and last I checked at least Imperium were literally paying people to sit AFK in response to this, and ganking in general, in their space.
BTW not agreeing entirely with the guy youâre responding too. Frankly Iâm both glad thereâs been some good discussion in this thread for once, and exapserated that both sides keep spoiling it by resorting to hyperbole and insults 
Well yes, of course itâs effective but only because there are tons of weak and risk-averse players to exploit. Itâs like the situation with suicide ganking: itâs very easy to avoid being a profitable gank target, but enough idiots keep flying expensive loot crates through popular gank systems that the gankers stay in business. In both cases the solution is for the players to stop being lazy and/or stupid, not for CCP to change the mechanics.
And still youâre wrong.
Lighting the cyno doesnât insta-spawn anything on top of you. The bridge has to be triggered and the fleet has to session change.
If youâre aligned, youâre in warp before this happens.
1 Like
It doesnât matter, the topic is cloaking and AFK and when the cyno is popped the person is neither.
Cyno is off topic.
1 Like
Nah, itâd still be effective even if there werenât, because the whole setup is extremely low risk for the AFK cloaker, and they only need to get lucky once to bag what will generally be a fairly shiny kill.
The difference here is that there are effective active counters that require roughly proportional effort that allow you to avoid something like a high sec gank. In this case the setup is entirely asymetrical in the AFK playersâ favor, and the gameplay around it is inactive, boring, and/or AFK.
This is correct, provided the person lighting the cyno hasnât pointed you as they did it.
Itâs really not. This is about the problem of AFK cloaking and the âgameplayâ around it, and all of this is related to that topic.
Itâs only low risk because there are too many lazy and stupid players. Maintain PvP defenses, donât fit excessive loot value on your farming ship, and donât camp on the warp-in beacon.
Also, remember that it doesnât take many black ops losses to negate your kills. Even a small chance of loss should be enough to end the threat entirely.
The difference here is that there are effective active counters that require roughly proportional effort that allow you to avoid something like a high sec gank.
Not really. The primary gank avoidance tool is passive: keeping your ISK to HP ratio below the point where you can be profitably ganked. Ganking is popular because of the steady supply of idiots who canât comprehend the idea of leaving some of your freighterâs cargo space empty.
In this case the setup is entirely asymetrical in the AFK playersâ favor, and the gameplay around it is inactive, boring, and/or AFK.
Again, only because of lazy and/or stupid players. Why donât you, for example, do your PvE farming in a fleet of 10 PvP fitted ships? Thatâs a major deterrent and everyone is actively playing the game.
This is correct, provided the person lighting the cyno hasnât pointed you as they did it.
In which case theyâre a paper tanked stealth bomber that you can probably one-shot before the incoming fleet can catch you. And if youâre aligned at full speed even a bomber canât catch you before you warp out (unless you screw up and let it).
PS: try using a MWD/MJD to constantly move around the PvE site so the attacker canât get within tackle range.
My theory is that the people that complain about AFK cloaky ships are just annoyed that they screw with their botting scripts.
1 Like
Itâs pretty much an open secret that this is the case, itâs just against forum rules to accuse specific players of RMT botting.
1 Like
The hilarious thing is that the people who actually bot will just whitelist the AFK camper after a couple of days of zero activity, and then go right back to krabbing.
If they go active and drop on a single Myrm or Gila, wow, congrats, thatâs a 250m ish loss. Compared to the billion they make daily per character, thatâs such a big hit.
Keep telling yourself that 
This thread is about people who want to have their own private system to farm and canât so they whine on the forums. The devs created this thread because their [whinners] â â â â â â â â cowardly whine was filling up the forums. This is version 3 and we are at 6553 posts, nothing is going to change.
2 Likes
Itâs really funny reading the defenders of 23/7 risk and effort free cloaky camping.
They are consistently arguing semantics (haha he isnât cloaked when he points you and lights a cyno), outright dumb stuff like âhaha rat in a PvP ship, your cruiser can totally win against whatever is cynoâd inâ, or they are straight making up strawmen accusing everyone who sees a problem with how it currently is of being carebears that are always wearing brown pants who believe there should be zero risk in null space. No one sensible is asking is saying any of that.
Itâs extremely obvious to anyone who isnât balls deep invested into this game with a complete lack of touch to normalcy that the effort and risk ratio is extremely heavily skewed in favour of the camper. He can choose exactly when to strike and observe his target for as long as he wants to. If you get baited or manage to lose the cloaky before the cyno is lit, you have to be pretty dumb. Having a defence fleet lined up 23/7 isnât feasible, unless perhaps if youâre in one of the 3 biggest nullblocs (and this only applies to capital ratting). So we can establish that even paying perfect attention while playing perfectly at all times will not save your shitty ratting cruiser/BC unless the guy who is cloaky camping messes up.
So who does afk cloaky camping hurt the most?
Not the botters. Theyâll eventually just whitelist the camper, and bake the loss of ships (e.g a perfectly serviceable ratting myrm insures up to ~50% of the upfront cost and) into their bottom line, which is neglible considering their bot accounts are running 23/7.
Not the established players with multiple accounts living in the biggest null blocs. They most likely have several other sources of income, and if they rat they can do it in capitals with cyno alts on standby which can call in the cavalry.
The ones it hurts the most is the smaller groups, and especially newer players within that group whose only decent source of income is subcap ratting. Itâs also a content killer, as less people will utilize that system. Whereas you might otherwise find Rattlesnakes and Carriers ratting, youâll in stead only have myrms to drop on and perhaps the odd ishtar/gila.
So if you support being cloaked 23/7 without any form of mechanic available that makes it possible for the defenders to locate and kill the camper after a reasonable amount of inactivity (you know, it should be risky being in space, the thing youâre so hypocritically preaching?), you directly support the notion that the newer and weaker should accept being shat on by people with much more time, resources and experience. â â â â the newbros, â â â â the smaller groups, long live the nullblocs.
So please, if youâre going to sit here and continually make fun of people pointing out all of these obvious facts, at least have the backbone to admit that you just want an easy and convenient way to kill ratting ships to stroke your ego and feel elite, with as little risk and effort on your end as possible.
And no, before you spout the usual nonsense my kb efficiency is 96% something, Iâve lost a total of one PvE ship in the past 2 years. I donât even rat much these days, but reading all this â â â â â â â â prompted me to write this.
My suggestions are as follows:
- New âanticloakâ module
This will put an increased decloak radius around your ship that knocks cloaks off. So with existing mechanics you need to be virtually rammed to be decloaked, but with new module it could give you a 30km or 40km range kind of deal.
The tradeoff for this module to keep it balanced should mirror a cloaking device as best as possible. I it runs without disabling any modules (but uses cap unlike the case for cloaks), but harms sensor resolution and uses a lot of CPU.
Only one can be fitted, and not with a cloaking device at the same time.
- New âanticloakâ depot
That depot can perform as a FW beacon, i.e. nothing can be cloaked within 30km or so of it, and it decloaks anything that gets close.
This problem seems extremely easy to solve to me with just the most basic logic. It definitely is a problem because null groups need a fair technique they can use to address this strategy. I dont know why this thread has struggled along for over 6000 responses to absolutely no useful end.
the day they nerf cloaking, is the day eve is truly dead
4 Likes