No problem, I’m just trolling Hug. He’s pissed, but I have been pissed off longer and yet I don’t whine like him.
He gave me ■■■■ in another topic, and didn’t even realize one of the hearts he received was from me lol.
I think the whole topic about changing names is why he doesn’t like me lol. oh well. I got better things to do than worry about huggy bear…
Yeah, I was going to give him a like in another thd for a comment I thought was “cheeky”, but his kind cant separate criticism and discussion from personal attack.
since you dont even know how long the module lasts, you can not have testet this very much. You can even have read the propeties of it. This is why no one is taking you serious. You seem to claim above IQ, and fail to realise even such a basic and fundamental detail.
Said with such confidence, but in the past I have seen a carrier dropped on a rifter, so I will take your comment as being unaware of what some players will do. Furthermore you are also ignoring the simple fact that some conflicts are personality driven or over the use of space.
In the past I was belt ratting in Stain, was something I did for fun, I ended up having NCDOT. cloaky camp all twelve systems that I used. So tell me again that no one is going to do this?
Too expensive.
I thought this was dumb with the cyno inhib and I think it dumb with this.
You know, it actually varies a ton - a single Joe Shmoe bashing rats in a Myrm or a VNI won’t make much beyond that an hour. Observatories will not be useful to him whatsoever. I mean, even with a blingy rattler you’d probably be better off with that safety being provided by running missions in hisec.
Where I can see them really fielded en masse is around the same areas that blow up unfit cyclones to ramp up/recover the bounty risk modifier for the day - where farming by say, a dude quadboxing deadspace fit ishtars happens.
(Not to mention things like capitals)
(Go figure - it’s renter-lands. Then again, a lot of space is renterlands currently anyway.)
Offensive use against “that guy cloaking up around” is more likely but that just rolls back to attrition and cheap cloaking ships.
1 Like
The mere existence of these structures is going to see cloaky cloaky camping decline massively. It’s not like activity will be unchanged, generally speaking players aren’t going to send cloaky campers out and just hope defenders won’t deploy the structure, that would be stupid. The frequency with which the structure is actually needed is likely to be very low.
I’m fully expecting to see cloaky camping decline massively almost straight away. I suspect a lot of active cloaky players won’t bother for hunting purposes either because while local is unchanged, there’s just no point. Defenders can see you coming just as easily in pretty much any ship so if you can be bothered trying to catch people rushing to the citadel the second you pop up in local to wait for you to leave, you might as well do it in a different, more suitable ship
I’ve read quite a bit recently between this and the AFK thread. While people are complaining about it being an egg timer, allow us the option to set the timer upon deployment.
Structures can have their timers set, so give the option to deploy and delay the timer, so then nobody will know the exact time frame.
As far as I estimate, it’ll dip initially as folks who legit hunt along with mass campers cease. The former will either call it and unsub or move on to - as you mention already - “more adequate” ships.
Mass campers are likely to weather the initial huzzah and refit for sigamps and essentially force people to break out virtues and pay 40-50mil to scan down and kill their easily replaced 50 mil ISK bomber. Since the entire thing is about breaking the enemy with attrition, this will just become a background element of it.
Since mass camping already relies on cheap bombers, there isn’t much of a change here.
Roaming null sec is pretty dreary at this point, the content/time & effort ratio is really poor so convincing people back into other ships might be a hard sell.
We can’t have a double standard here though, either 40-50mil is a lot or it isn’t. It can’t be “too expensive” for the structure but an insignificance for a throwaway bomber
I can’t agree there isn’t much of a change, there is the opportunity to remove these cloakies now which didn’t exist before. If they truly are AFK, they’ll disappear for a significant period of time. Even if it can require virtues to probe them down, that’s not the end of the world for an alliance.
Personally I don’t see making them hard to probe as being particularly problematic unless they’re active players. Even then, it’s hard for them to keep checking in every 15 mins with very little possibility of a kill up for a long time. Some players might, but I’ll be surprised if it’s not rare.
But granted, the meta does need to play out before any of us can say with certainty what the impact will be. I just know I wouldn’t hunt null sec in a covert ops with these new circumstances.
1 Like
A fair and balanced statement after everything I’ve read in this thd. With the beginning of summer and the kinda end of the pandemic, we are not going to see any real results till apx Sept.
Well, the day CCP releases the observatories, the afk cloaky campers will stop logging in. That effect shouldn’t require us to wait until September.
We’ll see I guess… You have more faith than I.
I’d like to point out that I didn’t put down price as a matter of “too cheap/too expensive” in this - I merely used it to point out that the financial investment on both sides is more or less equal - the bomber doesn’t really even “lose the ISK war” by all that much.
I have also done it to further underline how this mechanic encourages cloaky hunters to shift towards cheaper ships over Recons or T3s.
That price is also absolutely subject to a certain double-standard, it simply depends on who pays it. An alliance will have little trouble deploying a wave of observatories to remove cloaky campers from their space.
(Here I would like to point out that alliances already HAD a way of dealing with cloakers and their hotdrops - in the form of establishing umbrella fleets. CCP responded with multiple nerfs to that.)
Well that’s the question isn’t it. There’s no doubt this is a major nerf for certain cloaky playstyles. The question remains though how players will react. Like you say, some will walk. Others will try and mitigate the damage by exploring alternatives. The uncertainty I was referring to was the proportion between them and just how viable mitigation strategies can be. I personally don’t think the alternatives will be any good or used frequently. However, there is always room for the unknown and hopefully CCP are considering giving something back to the hunting community, given that they’re taking something away. But admittedly that’s probably wishful thinking considering past actions.
Atleast i’m humble enough to understand that this is true for the both of us.
you think “null krabs” has it so easy, krabs rack in +100m/hr, doing it afk, etc etc etc etc
as I said, I’m humble and I don’t have all the answers and I admit to have a limited view on the opposite side of things.
Yes. Still with limited experience, I can still understand what a cloak-fuel would present.
A cloak fuel would mean active and engaging gameplay, for all.
a cloak fuel would mean we would take turns, we would have a “cat and mouse” gameplay.
where the cloak is the cat for 45 min or so, and the krab becomes the cat when that fuel runs out and the Cloaker has to use a gate/filament.
See, im here to discuss.
unlike you who just want to trash talk the person(s) of opposite opinions.
see. you say that, but what is your proof? Who in null is making 4b/hr ?
oh I’m sorry..
who makes 4b (their ship) +50m for the mobile observatory - totaly passive, while they sit and scan cloaks for 90 min?
well you certanily havent.. havent explain anything at all..? you just push around words, hoping people would forget that you came with a false statment?
Yeah.. ok, yeah a hearth means I can’t ever object to your opinions ever in a discussion?
“he gave me ■■■■ ..” yeah.. sorry but not agreeing with you is not the same as “giving ■■■■”
tl;dr
unpopular opinion, hearting another one’s post doesn’t mean ■■■■.
here you are.. discussing a person(me) and not the topic.. lol. ^nice projecting your own problems.
nice troll attempt, go somewere else, i dont even take your seriously.
Ok let me rephrase:
if you drop one of these, you “can’t” be doing any ratting, as you should be sitting in a scanning ship. Also yes, I’m sure hate and personal conflict is a driving factor for blops drop, but for “average joe” in a vexor.. or a domi even, should not be worried if there is marauders/capitals in the same system.
I know, it’s too damn expensive!
but yeah, the real cost will be 50-70mil, as just the raw materials are 42m in Jita.
first days/week, they most likely are gonna sell for over 100m.
at this point, with the dbm, the majority of the “isk” is in salvaging and loot(reprocessing) .. 40 mil in just ticks, can take up to an hour to get, in a 2-5 billion ship(!).
so spending 50m on an observatory means you just lose that 50 mil, as you can’t be doing any krabbing, cus you need to spam scan the >entire< system.
so with the observatory in play, isk/hr -50 for ratting.
But these pvpv carebears of null dosent understand the perspective of the krabbers at all.
they will be isk positive without playing the game, that’s the only “big” change .
its not a double standard.I’m pretty sure a “throwaway bomber” last more then 90min.
a “throw-away bomber” is also a potential “throwaway”, you never know if it is.
you “invest” 50m into “fun” and potentially gain 5-50b in kills.
when you “invest” 50m, into an observatory…
you lose 50m that’s a given. also you “invest” 50mil into spamming a scan button for 90mins. (not fun)
Even if you do kill a 50 mil bomber, that would net you an ±0, you still lose your krab income.
1 Like
You guys are complaining that it isn’t good enough, I’m just happy they are giving us something.
I already invested in a Virtue pod and enough PI to make 40 of them. Will I spend time scanning and waste a few to non afk’ers? Sure. Will I enjoy killing the player with the “unscannable” ship because I prep’ed? Defiantly.
This will cut down cloaky camping, By how much we don’t know but it WILL cut it down more then 10%. Were going to go from 90% of entire regions cloaky camped 24/7 to being able to finally find pockets where there are empty systems. Finally be able to use something other then a vexor.
Cheers CCP for giving us a counter, I know Ill be using this new deployable.
2 Likes
You mean the ratter would set a timer on how lomg the hunter can remain around, dock and come back in an ~hour?
Because that’s the current in vogue response to any hostiles close by.
1 Like
I disagree, you have no idea what cloak fuel would present. Even after we repeatedly told you that it would break cloaky gameplay outside AFK cloaky camping.
Exploration would become impossible, as it heavily relies on being cloaked for hours in hostile space. But we’ve told you so before and you seem to ignore that.
I challenge you: pick some playstyles that aren’t ‘AFK cloaky camping’ that do require a cloak and do that for a few weeks. See how important cloaks are and see how impossible cloak fuel would make those playstyles. And then come back to this topic, not before.
1 Like
This is true. But it seems to me at least (I have to include that for Ridley) that it would be easier to macro a cloaked camper bot than a mining bot. For all the effort to cloak afk at all and for how much grief that just one toon causes, it would seem likely that some players will make the effort. Will it help, sure, for a couple months. I just don’t see it as the silver bullet everyone seems to think it is.