Mobile Observatories – Live on Singularity

EVE Technology and Research Center Test Server Feedback
,
716

No, anybody ratting in a carrier and expecting absolute safety is doing it wrong.

The game might have changed, I wouldn’t call it an evolution though as it’s got worse

You’re right about one thing though, I have been living in the past, I’ve actually dropped corp and decided to take an extended break from the game over the past couple of days because I don’t like the direction the game is heading in. The upcoming round of changes have confirmed what I’ve suspected for a while, which is that we’re heading for a consent based game, which is something I’ve no interest in playing.

I’m sure I’ll be back at some point, probably due to nostalgia but this transformation they’re undertaking just doesn’t interest me

717

yeah, tbh.
I already know what you’re talking about. but instead of trying to refute you’re attitude problem… I simply cut to the chase and rebuked your entire argument. End.

thats not how it work. I can drop 100 of these and they still immune for 15 minutes.
and then if that wasn’t the case… there’s always the argument on why I should pay a sort of “ingame isk ransom fee” to be able to clear the “my home of intruders”

everything above that is correct. To be correct thou, i said that the unscannable “secure container” should not be able to hold fuel… and “fuel trucks” should not be able to hold cloaks fuel. As those two things would break the entire cloak-fuel idea.

If “cloakfuel-depots” in space were scannable, I’d be all for that.
because that’s an exciting and vibrant function… that is fair.
is the croaky dropper gonna get counter dropped when he refuel? - who knows.

you mean “bother venture into sov null space from npc null space”? a typo from your part or havent you understood the idea?

Also; Why cant you think that a cov-cloak is more a a “peek-a-boo” item, instead of “safe from everything, always”?
explorers and all neuts are free to roam around in any system, even with cloaks (for a limited time, in sov null.)
But in SoV null they need to adapt to the fact that the system is owned - and it getts a little dicier.
They need to be active and think about when they should activate their cloak. for whatever reasons they are there…
is the cov ops an offensive or defensive countermeasure?
if they legit doing explo site - they aren’t cloaked anyways.
If they see neuts in local and probes on dscan, as they scan explo sites or whatever, they can cloak up.

They can also just scan a region down… on their way between to an NPC station - then buy more fuel and travel back.
Also sov/npc-null might not have a lot of stations? but there is lowsec as well you know. And maybe ccp thinks its possible to come up with a scannable deployable with a passcode, that can hold fuel…

ps.
really… stop dragging my corp into this, I’m an ordinary line member.
ALSO… how many of those 59 systems actually have people in them? i have no clue, im guessing… 20? hm.

anyone ratting in a carrier is doing it wrong. period.
FYI.a the carrier puts out tier 1 battleship ticks. Just pyfa the DPS of a carrier with resistances and applied dps etc etc… and you’ll see it has nothing to do with skill points or “piloting skills”

718

No, the system is not intended to clear your home of intruders. It is intended to help you clear out AFK cloakies. Your problem with cloaks in general is not something ccp can fix without making your beloved nullsec “home” a walled off flower garden.

2 Likes
719

same can be said of the cloak-fuel argument.

However.
The cloak-fuel idea do not come with the negative side effects the observatory does.

Negative side effects of the observatory:

  • it does not promote active gameplay.
  • It does not force players into makeing decision that matter.
  • It’s promoting almost impossible to catch botting.
  • Its not a system that weights into any risk/reward scenario.

Now, you state “but its not suppose to do all those things, its ONLY for afk-cloaking”.

And then i ask:
well… if ccp is gonna change the game, why shoulnt ccp try to atleast incorperate their “roadmap of eve”?

720

You shouldn’t have to pay a ransom. You should be able to defend “your” home. Nothing in EVE is “yours” unless you can defend it.

It is completely relevant. You are a “line member” of a SOV holding alliance with 15 THOUSAND members, and yet you have no way to defend your space other than to recommend what is essentially a complete nerf to cloaking in “your” space.

Luckily your idea is so convoluted and poorly thought out I can pretty much guarantee it would never get implemented.

1 Like
721

No, its not relevent at all.
I understand that you might think its relevant thou - becouse you also think i have said something about “not beeing able to defend”.

please stop putting words in my mouth… citation pls.

722

I think you have missunderstood my agenda here.
me explain, yet again.

I dont like my “home” to be a walled off flower garden. (DBS SYSTEM?)
The cloak fuel does not make any walls, at all.

it only promotes player to keep moving. Or find an empty system to hang in. and defenders can hunt/keep the pressure up etc etc.

45 minutes is far from enough to “set something up” (as brisc previously stated)
HE was happy with this observatory, but he was “working ccp” to bring the cloak immunization up to 30 mins.

so, in fact.
Im more for cloaks then brisc is.
i just want more active gameplay and less botting then him

723

Afk cloaking is going to be dead when these mobile observatories come live.

We will get more active gameplay, all the cloaky campers will need to be at their keyboard during the day, or at the very least once every 15 minutes, to stay alive.

You seem to want a way to stop cloaky camping. That will not happen.

This update stops afk cloaky camping.

724

They’re only immune when they are active.

Which is the intention, as these observatories are not intended to deal with active cloaking strategies like cloaky camping, but only to deal with inactive afk cloaky camping.

And yes, it’s going to cost you something in ISK or effort to clean your home of intruders.

725

this whole fuel idea…forgetting for a second its on par with trumpy suggesting we all inject ourselves with bleach.

It needs to be simple. a cloak either needs fuel or it doesnt. This notion that it depends on this and that and it degrades and you have got to do this but you cant carry this and at 12:01am im a pumpkin is just plain old mental.

And its very short sighted. I need to plan huh. Well as someone who lives in hs my cloak use is as follows. I get in my cov ops (sometimes even just my lowly T1 expo frigate) and i filament into null. From there i check where the sigs are and fly around scanning stuff down and then have an enjoyable time trying to get myself home whether thats a gate to gate route or through wormholes. Most of the time i make it back. But sometimes i dont. And everytime im at least partially hunted or harrassed in some way. Its usually a really fun few hours. I have a blast and i hope that those hunting me are successful to. It creates content for me. and it creates content for the hunters. Its win win.

This observatory module doesnt break that from my perspective because while im cloaked up a lot its hardly ever for more than 15 minutes coz it doesnt take that long to scan stuff and ill have moved onto hacking or flown to the next system. Im still fair game coz when im hacking i can be scanned down or jumped (id expect hunters will have sites scanned down already in a lot of cases)

The fuel idea completely wrecks it though. Some days i can be hours before i get home and a lot of that time i need to be cloaked. If fuel and how much fuel i can store becomes something i have to think about i just wouldnt do this as an activity. Which sucks coz its fun for me and creates content for people hunting me.

So all the fuel change would do is stop people engaging in fun activities. Explorers would just avoid sov null on tuesdays after tweleve when its raining in case the fact they are wearing pink socks with blue jeans happens to mean cloaking costs fuel…or not…

Can you tell i was confused.

1 Like
726

Yea, but it doesn’t matter what explorers want, as long as the krabbers can krab safely.

(P.S.: can this whole ‘cloak fuel’ idea go back to the main AFK cloak thread where it belongs?)

727

Y’all are so excited to get rid of afk nullsec cloaky campers that you are overlooking the fact that afk cloaking is used by some unknown number of players as a substitute for docking up. Rather than logging out and then logging back in, they just cloak up in a safe spot.

Yeah, you can kill that option, but then what? People aren’t allowed to leave their computer for more than 15 minutes, or they have to go through the rigamarole of safe-logout and then logging back in? This just makes the MMO even more intrusive into the player’s lives.

This change will be very annoying to a lot of people - not just the boogeymen that frightened nullsec miners cower from. It may also have a negative impact on online player counts. Omega players.

2 Likes
728

It’s not “doing it wrong”. Players can choose to do whatever they want. Not everybody is concerned about maximum efficiency

That perspective is what makes CCP’s updates so frustrating, at some point they clearly decided there was correct or approved ways of playing and they’re not too concerned at the very least about the collateral damage on other playstyles.

Farming is in, maybe because it scales better and the average player has more accounts. Or perhaps more mainstream gamers like it. IDK. But it’s not what eve was, and not what I want to do.

729

I’m not sure if most people still active in this thread have been here for the past 18 years. Some appear to be either liars or are probably posting with alt accounts only (for some reason). But i’m not judging, honest to God.

It’s simply that everything being discussed so far, that isn’t immediate feedback for the MOOB, seems to be echoing everything that has been said in those 18 years, as far as cloaks are concerned. I’m not sure CCP will listen to the same type of feedback/suggestion that has already been given ad nauseum.

And yeah, cloak fuel = bad mkay.

1 Like
730

Nice try. But no, you already proved you don’t even know how this thing works - but yet you should have an opinion… “drop multiple of these and farm cloaky tears”

LOL.
I Consider setting an alarm clock for 15 min ONLY to do a re-cloak warp as “being AFK”.
and not to mention the obvious 100% undetectable botting/macroing that these modules are gonna promote… zzz

Seriously?
Go play another game if you want “simple”.

No - your covops can be very short-lived. If you are unlucky.
Welcome to the world of filaments, they apply to all ships just the same. That is fair.
You are not supposed to be 100% safe just because you have a cloak

Also. all that is beside the point. The fuel idea still holds.
just get the “fuel” into the wh, problem solved.
You claim that you will lose content… ???
Your content will in fact increase - because now you have a mission of hauling in fuel.

Uhm. If you are exploring and you are worried that the attack will happen when you scan down sigs… well, you not really done exploring much.

well doh, if they remain cloaked as a substitute of logging off, ofcourse they now hafto log out.

if your not worried about maximum efficency - then your not griding/farming either.

nope. Cloak fuel endorses active fair and vibrant gameplay -where pilot choices matter.
observatory promotes alarmclock for 15 min and uncatchable botting.

731

CCP has a hard time picking their source:s that’s for sure.
And here’s why;
choosing between what is good and what is bad boils down to your own point of view.

In essence. This is what I believe, from my own point of view.
the “cloak-fuel” idea is bad. cloaky AFK camping is bad. the mobile observatory is bad.

But of these 3 “bad” choices. the only choice that actually supports what has been said in the dev blog is the “cloak fuel” idea.

And that’s also partially why I argue for a Cloak-fuel.

So… CCP has to make a choice. Will they adhese to their “roadmap” or listen to the opinions of the anual popularity contest winners? (CSM).

ps. stop using the term ad nauseum - you dont hafto be here.

732

My main gameplay in EVE consists of cloaky exploration for ISK and cloaky blops business for kills these days. And I’ve extensively tested these mobile observatories on the test server.

And you, someone who just wants to clean their ratting space of all hostiles, and is prepared to kill cloaked gameplay in order to do so, tell me “I don’t even know how this thing works”?!

I don’t think I’ll respond to any more of your rubbish in this thread. Good luck.

733

I’ll let you in on a secret.

This “solution” isn’t part of that roadmap. This would be CCP “throwing you a bone”

See, for as long as there have been cloaks, there have been afk cloaky campers. People have been complaining and whining for 12+ years. Every idea has been thrown out from fuel, to idle logout timers etc.

CCP doesn’t have a problem with cloaks. They never have. But they have been trying to clean up those who sit idle for extended periods of time.

So this module is the easiest way to give the complainers something to shut them up a bit, while affecting cloaking as little as possible.

I would bet all the isk on my account that we will NEVER see a cloak fuel that is only applicable in sov null, that requires a super special fuel that degrades unless in specific storage.

2 Likes
734

You know what, let’s have a fuel system.

BUT! In order for the system to be fair, let’s also have a similar system for ratters. So, as of now:

  • NPCs in sov 0.0 will no longer reward liquid ISK for kills
  • Each NPC will now drop bounty tags that can be exchanged for ISK
  • This exchange can only be done in high sec NPC stations
  • Bounty tags now degrade over time (in the span of 35 minutes - 1 hour depending on tag) reducing the amount of ISK you get. At full degradation, the tag is worth 0 ISK
  • Bounty tags cannot be transported in ships equipped with jump drive, cloaks, warp core stabilizers and interdiction nullifiers.

There now both systems promote actual active gameplay, now it is a fair change.

1 Like
735

I just don’t understand why you guys want less people in space. Cloaky camping is the number one reason people dont do stuff in space, creating targets.

It isn’t about pvp, its about economic damage to enemy’s, if it was about pvp they would want more people in space.

cloaky camping is simply bad for the game. The issue with bots is a problem, but there are a lot more real people who want to rat then you think.

This change will cause people to actually hunt. Instead of 50 people on the bridge, with 100 alts cloaky camping, it will be 30 people on the bridge and 20 people actually hunting. This will educate new hunters on how to do it, create more excitement between the hunters on coms. People will have to actually learn how to play the game instead of waiting on billy who has 50 alts covering the region to shout “I GOT ONE” and everyone jumping through the bridge for a 10 second kill.

You need to look at the positives this change will create. So many (real people, not bots) are excited at the prospect of going out into space after this change. Youll see more people in sites, in good ships, real ships that will be awesome kills that they never would have flown otherwise.