Mike himself admitted AFK cloakers pose no danger.
/thread
I didn’t know they can be in two places at once. Can you tell me more about that space magic?
1 Like
Basically in my view a module should not be changed in a way that affects multiple valid uses because one of those uses scares a group.
As I’ve said before it’s not the cloak that scares you, since the player has to de-cloak to do anything useful. It’s the ability to de-cloak and immediately cyno that is the problem, amend cynos so that they can’t be fit with a cloak and that problem goes away.
However there needs to be a trade-off in the perfect safety provided by local if this change were to be made otherwise there is an imbalance. An ATK player should not be able to generate ISK in space in perfect safety, and local currently allows for this.
1 Like
Why are you people so much retarded
wts popcorn
Because Alts are a thing.
Local provides no safety.
This is easily checked, simply go afk with hostiles in space in an area with local and don’t use a cloak.
You will find that local does not protect you in any way. It’s almost as if player actions do that instead, but that can’t be right, can it?
No, you clearly weren’t thinking because if you were thinking you’d realize how terrible an idea it is. The system index is largely a PvE thing, with the only PvP related component being passively holding your system (IOW if nobody bothers to attempt to take it from you it still increases). So essentially your idea is “the more PvE farming you do the safer PvE farming should be”. And PvE should not grant safety or any other benefits in PvP.
1 Like
Doesn’t protect you in any way? You mean a player can’t just warp out and dock the instant someone turns up in local? Which happens before said player can even load the system, let alone deploy probes, scan you down, warp to you, lock you and engage?
Nope, no protection at all.
1 Like
JFC you’re an idiot. Local does not protect you in the same sense that a cloak doesn’t protect you. After all, it’s a player action (moving your ship to a safespot and activating the cloak) that enables safety, not the cloak itself. If you want to test this go AFK next to a hostile fleet without activating your cloak and see how much safety the cloak provides.
The simple fact here is that local provides near-complete safety. You have to use local, in the same way that you have to press F1 to use your cloak, but once you use it the reward is effectively 100% safety.
Honestly, if you had just said this to begin with instead of arguing every time I said it, we wouldn’t have needed to discuss this at all.
The time setting up and leaving your AFK cloaky camp has opportunity cost. If you are ATK and still logged in on that character and cloaky camping you get tons of opportunity cost.
The AFK camping time itself does not.
I guess I didn’t need to give up or try to convince you to begin with… you already were convinced. You just kept trying to talk about ATK camping… for some reason.
No it still applies because I have opportunity cost with regards to how I spend that ISK.
And I could use that alt for other things so…opportunity cost.
Only when you’re ATK.
Which is the point. The cost for AFK camping is ONLY income for the time going to and from your camp (when you’re actually at the keyboard).
The decision to not take that character back to restart other AFK income sources and instead remaining at your camp while you are ATK is the expense for camping while at the keyboard.
You seem to realize that when you said this:
“My point is that when the player is ATK then opportunity cost applies.”
Remaining in a cloaky camp while ATK generates a cost. But it is not the cost for AFK camping. You can still go back and forth to set up passive income streams on that toon and log on to another toon and log out your camper to earn active isk while ATK. You only lose that if you choose to remain logged in and camping while at the keyboard.
You can keep all that if you only camp while AFK… with the only expense being the opportunity cost of getting to and from your camp.
The only time you sacrifice a mutually exclusive activity in order to camp while not at your keyboard… is the travel time while at the key board to set up your camp.
And congrats for drawing me back in by making me think you might have understood. That was kind of sneaky.
All the ‘Cost of AFK cloaking’ stuff is quite frankly irrelevant anyway. The nerf cloaks folks are asking for a change to a module (and therefore every hull that uses it to rebalance) because of a situation that they don’t like that only exists because of another mechanic. Yet they don’t consider changing the mechanic that makes AFK Cloaking possible in the first place.
This is basically ridiculous.
1 Like
correct, no protection at all.
The safety comes from the pilot warping to someplace where he can’t be attacked. Player action. Essentially people are upset because their targets don’t want to play the piñata game with them, and somehow they are unwilling to play as the piñata themselves which is why they cloak up like cowards for weeks on end.
Yes, Granted. Your opportunity cost is the ISK for that one plex.
It’s not the uncapped income of the most profitable thing in game, it’s just the ISK for the plex.
You should try actually thinking before rage posting such idiocy.
Your claim: Local Provides 100% safety. It’s easily proven false by simply not taking action and watching your ship explode as local doesn’t do anything at all to protect you. The pilot’s action, for which he must be present and paying attention, flying correctly and otherwise unhampered to take, is what keeps him safe.
The cloak does keep you safe. Just having one on your ship won’t do it, you have to activate it. So long as it is active you need do nothing else until the servers go offline. Totally safe from all further interaction until such time as you choose to allow others to interact with you. It’s a magic safety button that people like you are apparently so bad you can’t live without it’s comforting embrace since any idea that even hints that you might have to defend yourself sends you into that mad thrashing seizure you call posting.
warps in with Nemesis
stays cloaked
gets a Havana Bold sub from a nearby deli at Publix
Of course, they would have to rebalance everything else in the entire game except wormholes to change local, as it is intrinsic to every other part of the game.
Which I’d be personally fine with, the only realistic changes to local would result in no real change at all except to give what has been asked repeatedly: a way to be proactive in defending your space from cloaked invaders.
Tieing it to a structure just means that those who use local to evade hostiles won’t operate where there is an outage. Attacking the structure will result in whatever defensive measures exist being brought to bear, flown by pilots who actually enjoy that sort of thing, or at worst flown by pilots who can actually definitively win and then go back to doing something they actually enjoy.
I am fine with the idea that someone has to defend the space. I’m not fine with being threatened from an unassailable position. Sure you can do what you want in pvp fit ships when hostiles are present, but it’s better to engage with the hostile than to wait for him to engage on his terms, the whole while operating at reduced capacity simply because he exists.
JFC you’re an idiot. Local is a problem because it allows a player to farm the best PvE content with effectively 100% safety. The “player action” of pressing the warp button is a trivial action that deserves zero credit. Local provides all of the safety, by giving a 100% accurate warning of the presence of any potential threat with more than enough advance notice to escape with 100% certainty. The fact that the player has to complete the process by executing the final, trivial step is just tedious nitpicking of when exactly an interface button is pressed.
It really isn’t. Local is a chat mechanic, if they changed everything to work like wormhole space it would be a minor change that requires no other rebalancing.