Says who? EVE is a game for whoever finds fun in it.
In fact given the demographic breakdown of EVE players I would say it has a higher than average number of players who run into random interruptions by spouses, kids, etc than many games.
No it canât. âNerfâ is about game elements only, and you should read that as âin-gameâ.
Many people are stupid. Following along with stupid is not productive. Its a waste of time.
AFK is not a gameplay mechanic. Its literally non-play.
âIn video gaming a nerf is a change to a game that reduces the desirability or effectiveness of a particular game element. The term is also used as a verb for the act of making such a change.The opposite of nerf is buff (in one of that termâs two usages).â
More and more I question if you even play this game.
CCP is certainly not catering to them. If you want them to, thatâs fine. I presented ideas for that regarding this topic. You may favor those over the others.
I would disagree.
Many games have an idle timeout. In those games the developers made the decision that being idle is not part of their gamesâ âgameplayâ
CCP made the conscious decision to NOT have an idle timeout. They literally made being idle in the game all day long a valid option.
Again, what I said just before that was: âsince when does EVE award laziness?â You responded yet did not bother to try and answer such a basic question central to my claim of âEVE is not for the lazyâ.
If you wonât, then drop it.
Do we know WHY though? I donât think we do. If they wanted to have such a timeout but found it to be a practical problem at the time thatâs a FAR cry from âThey wanted it to be this way.â
Lemmee get this right. You think leaving your computer on and game running while you leave them both, get in the car and get some ice cream is âplaying the gameâ. Have I got that right?
It is irelevant. If I choose, I could log into EVE simply to chat with friends I have who play the game. I could have it sit idle most of the day, alt tabbing occasionally to chat with them.
In fact in my current state in 2020 RL has been super busy, and I do often hop into EVE to chat with fellow pilots. It is the only place they are all together.
âIâ find that rewarding, even though Iâm not generating any isk or blowing anything up.
And yes actually that character is doing this all day cloaked in space, because Iâm not anyhere that I can dock.
FACT- EVE doesnât kick you for being idle
FACT- CCP has nothing in the EULA saying sitting idle in game is against the rules
The why isnât relevant.
Iâm saying Iâm allowed to do that by the rules of the game.
Per my example above, if I were to log out I would miss parts of the ongoing conversation with friends in game. Maybe they are talking about something and I donât want to miss it, but my son just fell and got a gash in his head.
1 Like
You keep calling it an exploit while CCP has officially stated it is not.
3 Likes
In the first post this would be the only viable option that I could be OK with. Basically logging you out safely as if disconnected. If youâre sitting there cloaked AFK youâre not doing anything anyway.
The second post seems almost an expansion on this idea, and one Iâd be fine with as long as the time before this happens is fairly long. Say 3 hours. Enough to be a deterrent to bots perhaps while being long enough to not cause problems for someone sitting cloaked while hunting or gathering intel. Both valid game play styles which could involve sitting quietly and still for long periods of time
I do care, as do many others who at times find a safe spot in a wormhole, cloak up and walk away. I canât do anything when Iâm AFK, and no one can see me in Local either. But making a change to how cloaking works will effect that style of play. So if you want to drop me out of local after 2-3 hours of no activity and give me a 1-2 minute delay once I come back where I canât do anything but am still cloaked then Iâm fine with that compromise.
I agree. When Iâm playing I am not lazy. I just donât like waiting to log in. And as @Derath_Ellecon mentioned earlier waaayyyy back so many posts ago, sometimes you canât safely log out because you are being hunted. And CCP gave us cloaks. So I will use that cloak to make my ship cloak and hide in a safe spot. And if that is in nullsec and Iâm being hunted, and Iâm running/hiding most likely the locals know what I am capable of and are acting accordingly. If the safest option is to cloak and walk away for a few hours then that is what I am going to do. And I see nothing wrong with that.
Depends on the motive. If itâs just to leave it running, then thatâs just leaving it on. If your alliance is trying to keep an enemy from making ISK and a cloaky camper can stop them from doing that then that is playing the game as itâs designed. For myself itâs how I live in Eve. Rarely do I dock up overnight in a station.
Here we go again with someone butting in without following the conversation. My first statement on that line was âamounts to an exploitâ. And later I said âI call that an exploitâ, NOT âIt is an exploit and CCP agrees 100 percent.â
Further I think CCP put that in the list of exploits as ânot an exploitâ because they are not going to punish people for it, not because it isnât tantamount to an exploit, but because it is not something they will ban people for. In other words its not âan official exploitâ even if it basically is an exploit.
Its also not a technical exploit because its not a flaw in the software. But the end result is very much like an exploit, thus why I said âamounts to an exploitâ first thing.
Do I have to teach an English class here?
You thinking it is an exploit does not make it one. I just posted you CCPâs stance about it.
NOTHING is strictly relevant here except having ideas and being constructive about them.
And other than Japanese you must be the first person I know to seriously say that the âwhyâ isnât relevant when its ALWAYS relevant. Believing it snot is WHY they lost WWII. They never ask why and frak up a lot because of it.
What part of âamounts to an exploitâ is confusing you?
Stop falsely accusing me. I explained this in detail.
I have the right to say what I want about this subject, just as you. I do not care if you feel insulted that I donât agree with you or that I donât care about you talking semantics.
Then you misunderstand. Iâm sure there is a relevant WHY to CCP. What that is is not relevant to us. If they choose not to share the WHY itâs frankly none of our business. Itâs their game not ours.
Thatâs nonsense and I have already explained how I repeatedly logged out while being hunted in null sec and did not even have a cloak.
after this you saidâŚ
And you meant an AFK cloaky camper and stopping others is âdoing somethingâ. So please make up your mind. Either an AFK cloaker can do something or they can do nothing. Choose.
Ah cmon you know you are being purposefully obtuse with that.
Why are you clinging to the idea that the why is intentionally being hidden? There is a hundred reasons why they have not taken the step of providing that information, including just not even thinking to explain.
But we were invited here to present ideas. Understanding and even guessing the âwhyâ can help us to do that. Its not irrelevant. Its VERY relevant.
I am not and that was not directed at you.
Either AFK cloaking is ineffective or it is effective. Its a key point here.
And I maintain that AFK people affecting VMAK players is BS.