Realizing of course that a COVERT cyno cannot be lit while cloaked.
That the COVERT stands for the visiblity of the CYNO beacon.
as if nullbears didnât cry so loud when the black out was imposed and the drifters did some surprise attack.LOL. Donât act tough mate. CCP does unpredictable things. Null is not excluded.
You seem to have missed the memo that ALL carebears are garbage, it doesnât matter what area of space theyâre from.
1 Like
This is an idea section and no problem is required to present an idea. Ideas can be to simply make a good thing better. So I will rephrase your question:
âIs there a problem your idea is meant to address? If not, what is the benefit?â
If you want to propose an idea is âbetterâ, then you must first establish that the status quo is flawed in some manner, so that your âbetterâ idea can improve the circumstances.
1 Like
The very idea of local is a strange one. I would not even know where to look for proper lore about it. But the idea I have is that all our ships are outfitted with mandatory transponders as per treaties and laws concerning the peace between empires and Concord. But of course this comes into serious question now as the Trigs do not appear in local and so seem to have no transponders. And if they donât they would seem to be in violation and Concord would shoot them down or at least tell them to move on immediately. Instead Concord smiles and waves.
Keeping my image in mind I always thought it should be possible to tamper with your transponder to get out of local. But as usual that would seem to require other changes to game mechanics. One I would propose is that you can get out of local but your ship would be come immobile. So you can sit there cloaked AFK or even VMAK gathering intel. And you basically would not be able to enter a system with your transponder off so at least the people in system will have a chance to detect the presence of anyone entering system for a short time at least.
Due to market orders and purchases I now have about 50 million Isk. All told my situation is good in my opinion, but it could be better. No flaw is required for something to be better. Even if I had 1 billion isk my situtation could be better without being flawed or there being a problem. Its the same thing with anything in EVE. NOTHING is perfect, therefore, anything could be BETTER.
The AFK and cloaking situation could be BETTER, even if one thinks its neither a problem, nor flawed.
So this is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The problem here is that youâre making the unfounded implication that whatever you propose would be âbetterâ despite not actually establishing what objective metrics everyone can use to determine whether something is âbetterâ or not.
So, in that line, let me ask you, what metrics are you using to determine whether something is âbetterâ or not? Because all I see right now, is you suggesting that that the current system can be âbetterâ, but not actually explaining by why metrics something is âbetterâ (and by corollary, something (i.e. the current system) is "worse).
Iâd love to hear your explanation on this, instead of your repeated proposals for change.
We know what you want. We want to know why you want it. (and since I know youâre going to, just saying âit could be betterâ doesnât cut it unless you expressly explain the metrics by which something can be judged as âbetterâ)
Since explanations within the topic confound you so utterly, I posted an analogy. Its a commonly accepted thing to do when someone cannot process the topic.
But telling me something is off topic, is itself off topic. Stop being a hypocrite and report me if you have a problem.
I am not saying my idea would be better. It âmightâ be. I am offering an idea for discussion as per the terms of the idea section of this forum.
Tough. Learn where you are right now. Also know that the past behavior of you and others has precluded the very commmentary you ask for now. Flesh out ideas on your own. Its literally part of what this section is for.
No you donât. I donât even know what I want with regards to this. I already said I have no actual horse in this race. This is an ideas section and ideas discussion section. I presented ideas for discussion. Discuss the ideas. Naysaying everything is not discussion.
Find your own metrics. Present ideas. Present ideas other than the ones you already presented. If you have been stuck on âabolish localâ for weeks, you are not having ideas. You are just being a boat anchor in the desert if thatâs the case.
As for your insistence that a suggestion does not have to address an issue or solve a problem, you are hanging that on the concept of this being a general discussion space. It is not . This is a forum for the proposal of changes to the game. Making a change costs CCP money . Part of any proposal here is why should CCP make this change, given it is an expense to CCP to do so and that CCP is in the business of making money off of EVE . If the only reason to make a change is âbecause it would be new/different/coolâ, the proposal is in fact a bad idea with regards to changing EVE Online at CCPâs expense . It can still be interesting and cool, but that doesnât make it good and it is valid to criticize the idea on that basis.
This statement still stands as accurate. If you make a proposal, players have every right to question why the proposal is good for the game. Thatâs what Scoots is doing, and you are dodging it. Please explain why making any of your proposed changes would be good for EVE, with the understanding that any change is at a cost to CCP. If there is no reason to make the change, why are you proposing it? This is not a âwhat ifâ forum, it is a suggestion forum for actual development of game changes to improve the game environment.
Irrevelant, ignored.
No backtracking.
You stated that the current circumstances âcould be betterâ and thus made a proposal to change the current systems. So tell me, by what metrics is your proposal âbetterâ than the status quo?
So you refuse to explain how your suggestion is better, while at the same time hiding behind the claim that âthe system could be betterâ? Wow ,thatâs very persuasive. Let me guess, Iâm sure you also have a ton of evidence to support you claims, but I just need to Google it to find them as well, right?
Yes we do.
You want to be a coward and farm without any threat. Threat, which, btw, is entirely in your own head.
Afk cloaky camping is not a problem.
Iâm okay with the status quo.
I have no incentive to present ideas, nor is there any need for me to present ideas in order to defend the status quo as it stands.
If some of you cannot tolerate uncertainty then there is a place for you in this game. It is called High Security space. Go play there.
Iâm pretty sure that this wasnât supposed to be directed at me.
I never questioned anyoneâs right to question. Of course they have every right. What they donât have is the right to do is be a trolling pest harassing someone for an answer.
I have every right to not provide an answer because I am under no obligation to provide one. Its simply not in the guidelines provided by the Devs for this section.
And being that Scoots Choco is a troll as proven time and time again, I cannot be bothered to answer any question from him whatsover. He is not interested in discussion. He is simply interested in derailing this thread while wasting people`s time and spirit. No matter what I say he will just dismiss it out of hand like he does everything else. Not interested.
And I can prove what I say:
I explained why it need not be a problem, and he ignored the fact and keeps repeating this irrelevant mantra anyway.
Done.
Oh, and what is also annoying is that I answered this question but here you are piping up to back up Scoots anyway. So here I go repeating myself: No one wants to react to ghosts. We log onto an MMORPG to deal with people actually playing, not people âmaybeâ playing. I believe better insurance that people in local are actually playing the game is going to contribute to player immersion.
Pretty sure I mentioned some other things as well. If you canât be bothered to check, then you can just stop pretending I havenât, cause you obviously are not paying attention.
Of course you donât have to answer anything. On the flip side anyone else is allowed to discount your idea if you have no desire or ability to defend it from criticism.
The point being, sure you can throw out an âideaâ, not expand upon it, not anwser criticisms or questions about it. But then donât get bent out of shape when others discount your ideas on that basis.
Anyhow,
To expand on the idea of local, here is another âideaâ. I will admit Iâm not a super fan of it, even though I am throwing it out there. However it seems maybe an ok compromise.
If you are cloaked AND you go AFK after a period of time, you disappear from local.
What does this achieve?
- No need to change cloaking mechanics
- Does not completely remove local
- Does give some intel, as the player blips off local, however it isnât âperfectâ intel. If you donât see a ship pop up on dscan you cannot be sure if they logged out, left system, or are still just cloaked up but afk.
Sure someone I guess could game the system by having a keypress so they never go âafkâ. But given that macros etc are already against the eula they are risking a ban.
afk cloaking only exists as countermeasure to the overpowered intel tool we know as local chat.
We shouldnât ask CCP to âfixâ the one without the other.
You are so focused on defense and criticism. You are too negative for an ideas section.
You write that, yet have been jumping my $#!T for dozens of posts? Should I shoot back that it sounds like you are unprepared to âdefendâ it since you are not a super fan?
Thatâs a good idea. Glad I thought of it and posted it over a week ago (and others before me) and you read it and have been jumping my $#!T ever since.
Its also already been mentioned by another how that can be abused. Springing from not in local, to back in local suddenly and potentially already right on top of a victim somewhere in system to decloak and pop them is a mechanic of game breaking proportion.
And its already also been mentioned ideas of introducing a delay once a pilot is determined to be back from AFK to avoid that issue and help the idea work, by me and others.
Did you have an idea or only a complaint?
just a complaint to your one-sided, malinformed, dishonest but ignorant view on this topic.
4 Likes