Search

 
 Join the Community, Create an EVE-ONLINE account or log in.

open All Channels
sepopen Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked A Way To Detect Cloaked Ships Without Destroying Cloaking Completely
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

New Topic   
 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (12)

Author Topic

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 01:43:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Kittamaru on 28/11/2008 16:20:23
Problem: AFK Perma-Cloaking kinda sucks... and the fact that cloaking is 100% uncounterable is kind of stupid.

Solution: Three modules

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ON GRID DETECTION:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New Skill: Electromagnetic Pulse Wave Systems
Rank: 10
Pre Reqs: Astrometrics lvl 5, Electronic Warfare lvl 5

Effect: Allows the use of EM Pulse Wave modules. Decreases capacitor use by 15% per level, Decreases cycle time by 5% per level. Reduces variation by 5km per level.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Module: Electromagnetic Pulse Wave Generator
Fitting Reqs: 50 CPU, 5 PG - ONLY ONE EM PULSE MODULE PER SHIP
Fitting Penalty: -25% to total Capacitor Recharge Rate, -75% to scan resolution
Activation cost: 250 cap
Duration: 420 seconds
Range: 500km (full grid)
Variation: 25km

Effect:
When you activate the module, your tactical display is brought up on screen and 3 coloured arrows appear. Red indicates the X axis, Blue the Y, and Green the Z. These initially appear in the CENTER of the tactical display. When the module cycle is completed, they will move to the 10km line and give bearings towards the target - by lining them up, you can find a general direction towards a cloaked enemy vessel. HOWEVER, these lines do not update until the end of the module cycle (300 sec), meaning if you go to fast, you'll overshoot. This means it will take time and patience to narrow down where a cloaked vessel is hiding.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

New skill: Electromagnetic Pulse Beam Systems
Rank: 12
Pre Reqs - Astrometrics lvl 5, Electronic Warfare lvl 5, Electromagnetic Pulse Wave Systems lvl 3

Effect: Allows the use of EM Pulse Beam modules. ecreases capacitor use by 15% per level. Increases range by 5km per level (+25km lvl 5). Reduces variation by 2km per level.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Module: Electromagnetic Pulse Beam Generator
Fitting Reqs: 100 CPU, 1 PG - ONLY ONE EM PULSE MODULE PER SHIP
Fitting Penalty: -25% to Capacitor Recharge Rate, -90% to scan resolution
Activation cost: 250 cap
Duration: 300 seconds
Range: 25km
Variation: 10km

Effect :
When you activate the module, your tactical display is brought up on screen. Three coloured arrows (Red, Blue, and Green) appear. Red indicates the X axis, Blue the Y, and Green the Z. These initially appear in the CENTER of the tactical display. When the module cycle is completed, they will move to the 10km line and give bearings towards the target - by lining them up, you can find a general direction towards a cloaked enemy vessel. HOWEVER, these lines do not update until the end of the module cycle (15-30 seconds depending on skills), meaning that unless you are careful, you'll overshoot.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This gives a way to find cloaked ships WITHOUT nerfing cloaking itself OR intelligence gathering.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The numbers have been updated thanks to feedback from Willage Girl and a handful of others. The primary idea is this:

The modules have a long enough cycle time to allow escape from even a large T2 bubble camp IF the person cloaked is smart enough to make the odd course correction to throw the scanners off. The durations should give more than enough time to evade, especially in a ship with a cloak bonus.

Think of it like this:

Cloaked Ship - X1, X2
Scanner Ship - Y

Y



X1-------------X2

The cloaked ship is at X1 when the scanner module starts. Thus, Y will get the location of X1 when the cycle finishes. However, assuming he's moving, the cloaked ship will be at X2, so at next cycle, the picture is this.

Y--------------X1------------X2

A simple course change and X2 can rinse and repeat, and escape.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 01:43:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Kittamaru on 08/12/2008 02:48:01
Edited by: Kittamaru on 28/11/2008 16:22:24
To find a character cloaked off grid:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New Skill: Magnetic Anomaly Detector Operation
Rank: 8
Pre Reqs: Astrometrics lvl 5, Electronic Warfare lvl 5
Effect: 15% reduction to duration of Mag Flux Detectors per level
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

New effect for Electronic Attack frigs - 99% reduction on CPU / PG need for Magnetic Flux Detectors.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Module: Magnetic Anomaly Detector
Range: 999 AU
Fitting Reqs: 10,000 CPU, 1 PG
Duration: 1200 seconds
Cap Use: 20 cap
Cap Penalty: -25%
Sensor Penalty: -90% sensor resolution (highly modifies the sensor grid)

Effect: Gives a warp in point somewhere RANDOM on grid to a cloaked ship. This allows you to have allies with EM Pulse modules warp in and attempt to locate the person in question.

At low levels, this takes a LONG time to cycle, but at higher levels it drops significantly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There you go - a way to find THE OFF GRID AFK cloakers who are in system, then the ability to, with teamwork, find them and take em down.

Let me give a reason on this -

The people searching you are fighting against:

Not having a direct line to follow (only a 90% accurate set of bearings)
Not being able to see you
Having to wait for the scan to complete every cycle as they are moving
The cloaked ship being able to move
The cloaked ship being able to SEE them
Not being able to lock the cloaked ship after they decloak them (due to the resolution penalty)

The cloaked ship is having to contend with:

The chance of actually, possibly being found by a determined group
Not being able to simply cloak and go to bed / eat / go to work / have sex / et al

QUICK UPDATE

1) The scanning ship is criminally flagged (The high-energy of the EM Pulses/Beams ****s with police scanners. As such, using it in .5 or higher = concordokken) + you get aggro/gatelock/nodock/et al

2) Any ship that is cloaked "shimmers" when they are detected. This gives them a few precious seconds warning to GTFO and MOVE before either someone comes speeding their way OR a fleet drops in on grid.

When I say shimmers when detected, I mean at the start of the module cycle, their cloak gets fuzzy and they phases in an out. Only THEY can see this (nobody else can) and it happens before any detection actually occurs, but it gives them the total module cycle time + the transit time to their location to turn tail and run or prepare for battle.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 01:44:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Kittamaru on 14/12/2008 15:19:13
Edited by: Kittamaru on 14/12/2008 15:15:02
Conditional Things:

Modules (excluding off-grid detection) cannot be activated within 75km of a stargate or station. - This means the long-range module could be used with limited success, but the short range one (which tells you where they are more directly) could not. This preserves cloaks usefulness in running gatecamps, which is NOT what I want to change.

Cloak Type Scan Time Modifiers:

T1 Standard - 1x
T1 Faction - 2x
T2 Improved - 2x
T2 Faction - 3x
T2 CovertOps- 5x

I do believe I have seen faction cloaks in game - if not, ignore those numbers. Yes, Cov Ops cloaks adds a FIVE TIMES modifier to the detection times of these modules. The way these modifiers work is it would take 1 cycle to find a T1 standard, 2 for a faction or T2 improved, 3 for a faction improved, and 5 for a cov ops. The scanner would let the user KNOW there is SOMETHING there, but they'd have to keep the module cycling up to 5 cycles to pinpoint the cov ops cloak. Oh, and that's only as long as they stay on the same grid.

Galactic Tycoon
Posted - 2008.11.22 01:50:00 - [4]
 

I disagree, a cloak is a cloak it shouldn't be able to be penetrated. It's fine how it is in that you get close to it you decloak.

Less people would go into 0.0/low sec with counter measures on the cloak. Less people to hunt when it's not all that easy to hunt someone down and fight them.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 01:51:00 - [5]
 

*sigh* This has already been covered...

Cloaking as a means of DEFENSE is fine... but it SHOULD NOT be an "I Win button".

I've had more than enough people agree that cloaking needs a counter... unless you can provide a reason why my idea is bad or needs revised, don't simply say "bad idea no want". K? I'll work as much as I can to refine this idea until both sides are happy... but a median MUST be found. Right now, even Macro's are invincible thanks to cloak mechanics...

Galactic Tycoon
Posted - 2008.11.22 02:21:00 - [6]
 

Your idea is sound and doesn't really need to be edited.

I'm simply saying a cloak should be a cloak. As annoying as it is for someone to cloak at a safe spot, the player should have some ability to withdraw or hide from hostiles. Especially in the case of you really have to go afk, if that happens you shouldn't have to worry about being discovered.

You can still be pulled into a bubble and decloaked, you can still get spotted cloaking up and have an interceptor zipping towards you and you still have to decloak and cloak back up on jumping through gates. I don't see how it's a complete win /win module.

Most games will have some sort of option in which you can hide either by cloaking or laying in lurk in the darkness, behind objects etc. In eve and open space there are no means to hide naturally, hence the cloak. I believe it to be necessary a player has the right to chose to withdraw or lay low.

I do like you thinking and I would like Eve to be a game where it's easier to find pilots in systems. I just think further handicapping a largely 'flight' mechanism is too significant a change in the way combat is in eve. It would also make black and covert ops not so special and intell far harder. Alliances depends on intell to crush gangs and launch attacks.

As I say, I like your design and respect your opinion.



Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 02:24:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Galactic Tycoon
Your idea is sound and doesn't really need to be edited.

I'm simply saying a cloak should be a cloak. As annoying as it is for someone to cloak at a safe spot, the player should have some ability to withdraw or hide from hostiles. Especially in the case of you really have to go afk, if that happens you shouldn't have to worry about being discovered.

For something like this... cloak and log off. By the time anyone can get the scans run (at least 5 minutes with 3 maxed out pilots) you should have warped to safety.

You can still be pulled into a bubble and decloaked, you can still get spotted cloaking up and have an interceptor zipping towards you and you still have to decloak and cloak back up on jumping through gates. I don't see how it's a complete win /win module.

Actually, bubbles don't suck you out of warp. They'll pull you further off the gate, but just hitting the bubble doesn't (I believe) Decloak you. Also, my modules wouldn't affect any of the issues you brought up here.

Most games will have some sort of option in which you can hide either by cloaking or laying in lurk in the darkness, behind objects etc. In eve and open space there are no means to hide naturally, hence the cloak. I believe it to be necessary a player has the right to chose to withdraw or lay low.

Yes, but in those games that's not a 100% guarantee you won't be found. It just makes it harder... as cloaking should do here.

I do like you thinking and I would like Eve to be a game where it's easier to find pilots in systems. I just think further handicapping a largely 'flight' mechanism is too significant a change in the way combat is in eve. It would also make black and covert ops not so special and intell far harder. Alliances depends on intell to crush gangs and launch attacks.

Cloaking is in no way a "run" mechanism, in the fact that (save the cov ops ships), you cannot run with a cloak on. My modules don't affect the ability to run, they just remove the ability to sit forever without moving.

As I say, I like your design and respect your opinion.
I appreciate that mate :)




I responded in bold :)

Rivur'Tam
X10 PUNISHM4NT
Posted - 2008.11.22 03:18:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Rivur''Tam on 22/11/2008 03:29:36

Cloaking is fine as it is.

Only people moaning is ***got allainces that can't rat or mine, because a hostile is cloaked in system.

EDIT: i noticed this is a double post because you got flamed for your stuiped idea in the last one.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 05:49:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Kittamaru on 19/12/2008 13:02:38
I hardly got flamed - a lot of (highly constructive) criticism was said there, which I incorporated into the new idea.

And cloaking is not fine... Even CCP has admitted this. So either put up or shut up - as I said, constructive only please. otherwise keep it in your pants - your e-peen impresses nobody.

Anyway, back on topic - can anyone put out a good reason NOT to do this?

As I said already - it doesn't nerf actively participating cloakers in ANY way, as they can simply warp, move, change direction, fart in the general direction of the incoming players, et al. and avoid detection.

Edited for poor character on my part

Cheopis
Amarr
One Stop Mining Shop
One Stop Research
Posted - 2008.11.22 07:24:00 - [10]
 

So in essence, what you are suggesting is:

One module to allow you to warp to a random location in a grid where there is a cloaked ship.

One module for fairly inaccurate long range same-grid detection

One module for short range accurate same grid detection.


The process would normally be a 1-2-3 process that takes a while to implement


The process would be:

1) Highly effective against AFK cloaked persons
2) Reasonably effective against ships that suffer huge speed penalties in cloak
3) Almost useless against specialist cloaking ships that move quickly in cloak

If I have understood correctly, then I /sign

FarosWarrior
Amarr
Sonnema
Posted - 2008.11.22 11:40:00 - [11]
 

permacloaking imo isnt an exploit, its not stupid and you shouldnt be able to penetrate a cloak

why?

1: if someone in 0.0 cloaks up in a system to stop people from ratting, the cloaker is probably AFK and thus cant do anything. in that case its you that are afraid to undock or rat because theres a red cloaked in system which CANT do anything

2: a cloaked ship has certain penalties to locking after decloak (except some covops/recons/black ops, from which I'm told not the best choice for pvp) so should someone come by and decloak with the intention of killing you, most of the time you can run before he got a point on you

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.22 18:11:00 - [12]
 

Have you ever dealt with one or two cloakers in system?

Here's the problem - A cloaked Raven or two can load up with 2 sensor damps and high-damage missiles, find a ratter or miner, and obliterate them. Then run away and re-cloak before any kind of defense can be organized.

OR

If a defense stays organized 23/7 while the cloaked ship is AFK, it costs even MORE isk.

So, tell me... this kind of psychological warfare... it should have some sort of counter, right? I mean, even CCP has acknowledged this... so stay on topic. Instead of saying "no want", say how we can make it better so you WOULD want it.

Tasko Pal
THE IRIS
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2008.11.22 18:35:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: FarosWarrior
permacloaking imo isnt an exploit, its not stupid and you shouldnt be able to penetrate a cloak

why?

1: if someone in 0.0 cloaks up in a system to stop people from ratting, the cloaker is probably AFK and thus cant do anything. in that case its you that are afraid to undock or rat because theres a red cloaked in system which CANT do anything

2: a cloaked ship has certain penalties to locking after decloak (except some covops/recons/black ops, from which I'm told not the best choice for pvp) so should someone come by and decloak with the intention of killing you, most of the time you can run before he got a point on you


Here's how I see it. Currently, a cloaked ship, whether afk or not, is a very safe way to gather intelligence about potential foes passing through a system. It can be the eyes for a gang waiting to pop a mining op or other group activity.

Second, there are a number of ways to keep a target from running while a uncloaking ship acquires lock. Maybe the cloaked ship is fitted with a rack of smartbombs (this can instakill small ships and mining barges). Maybe the cloaked ship just bumps your ship till a lock can be acquired. Maybe the uncloaking ship opens a cyno for a gang hotdrop.

Third, you don't actually give a reason why afk cloaked ships should be safe. What's the benefit to the game from having cloaking as a means to be completely uncatchable?

Ashley Thomas
Veneratio Venator Alliance
Posted - 2008.11.22 21:15:00 - [14]
 

#11

biggest problem with this, they know your there watching them.

Tasha Voronina
Caldari
Caldari Navy Reserve Force
Posted - 2008.11.22 22:28:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Tasha Voronina on 22/11/2008 22:30:32
Edited by: Tasha Voronina on 22/11/2008 22:29:29
This is actually a great idea - and I do fly cloaked ships myself.

edit: I think that's the point of it - people who aren't afk should be extremely hard (if not impossible) to find when cloaked. This actually is a counter to AFK cloaking, nothing else.


Just a thought... if there are people who want to be able to go afk in a system when RL demands it of them (and fit a cloak because of this)- then how about adding a powered-down state for a ship? It would power down immediately, and to power everything up again would take time (let's say 5 minutes?).

The effects of such an action would be that the ship in question loses the ability to activate any modules bar a cloaking device, to use the scanner, to read any chat channel (yes, this includes local) or reply in one, to warp and to move. To compensate, a ship hidden this way can not be found at all except coincidentally bumping into it (but hey, what harm is a ship that is blind and can't move?).
Simply being powered down would have the effect a normal cloak would have (you're invisible (unless something moves into a 5km radius) and unscannable, except to those EMP modules detecting cloaked ships) with all the abovementioned drawbacks.


If memory serves, this has been suggested before somewhere on these forums somewhere - just thought it deserved a mention here. Alternatives to logging out ftw.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.23 01:25:00 - [16]
 

Glad to see productive posts!

I like the idea of a powered down state, but I doubt CCP would do that sadly.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.23 18:02:00 - [17]
 

Back up to the top for more discussion.

WillageGirl
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium
Posted - 2008.11.23 18:24:00 - [18]
 

Idea is well thought and all, but unfortunately trying to solve the wrong issue.

Cloak is fine as it is. It's doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing. Only thing wrong is the mechanism that allows pilots to utilize this module so effectively. Rolling Eyes

Thats right! The problem is local and the way it is used. Without local there's no issue with people going AFK while cloaked. There is also a better change to get to your target undetected when you are the attacking party, which will remove to need to sit in system for hours seemingly AFK to get a shot at your target.

Mihailo Great
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.11.23 19:01:00 - [19]
 

Tell me more about how much of a terrible player you must be to consider the enemy's cloaking ability an "i-win button".

When's he cloak for a long time, do you lose HP?

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.23 19:21:00 - [20]
 

Sorry you two - but CCP has said in their blogs they think cloaking needs a change...

I'm trying to propose a system that will allow the change WITHOUT nerfing the module itself.

Booken Blue
Federal Defence Union
Posted - 2008.11.23 19:35:00 - [21]
 

I like the same-grid modules. Off-grid cloaking is fine and should remain untouched. I'd like to see the short/long range merged into a single module, and it should use probes (or a specific ammo) to define range and accuracy.

Also, improve the CPU/Grid requirement. What you put in there is way too low.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.11.23 20:18:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Murina on 23/11/2008 20:27:55

Originally by: Kittamaru
Cloaking as a means of DEFENSE is fine... but it SHOULD NOT be an "I Win button".




1. Cloaking never will be and utterly is not a I-WIN button.

2. Cloaking is a counter to probing and scanning.

3. A cloaked ship is invulnerable to everything apart from a on grid/in range DDD, and while its cloaked every other ship is invulnerable to it, as it can do nothing while the cloak is operating.

4. A ship with a cloak (apart from SB) take heavy penalties for fitting a cloak even if it is kept off line to save cpu while fighting.


5. The threat of AFK cloakers can be countered by simple organizational skills like being in a gang. And the NON-AFK cloakers can also be countered the same way.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.23 23:05:00 - [23]
 

No, they can't. Because the cloaker has every card in his hand... period. Again, CCP has already mentioned that they plan to give a way to counter cloaking - I want it to be my idea because that way it's not something that'll make cloaking useless....

As for using probes - off grid detection is the big concern of mine - I want it to be difficult, inaccurate, and time consuming, but possible IF you are determined to spend 30+ minutes hunting one guy who could just as easily warp somewhere else as soon as you appear on grid. It is this mechanic that allows cloaks to remain useful as a means of gathering intel and hiding, but removes the ability to go AFK or use it with Macro's to stay alive :)

Nnamuachs
Caldari
Kiith Paktu
Veneratio Venator Alliance
Posted - 2008.11.23 23:25:00 - [24]
 

how can you have a revised final solution... that would make the original final solution not a final solution...

but anyways. as i stated another way.. the final solution to cloak whining is to stop whining about it.. relabel your thread to actually indicate the issue you're trying to solve.. because the "solution for cloak whining threads" are usually whine threads.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.24 04:05:00 - [25]
 

Fine, I'll re-label the thread.

Strill
Posted - 2008.11.24 04:09:00 - [26]
 

They already have anti-cloaking pulses in the item database. If they haven't implemented them then they probably don't intend to.

Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.24 05:25:00 - [27]
 

Okay, as everyone seems to be missing the point, I'll edit the initial post once more to state the following:

I don't care if you agree or not... state ways we can provide an effective way to counter cloaking without making cloaking useless as an active, capable intelligence gathering tool.

Boma Airaken
Harlock's Vindicta
Aggressive Dissonance
Posted - 2008.11.24 06:08:00 - [28]
 

OMG shut up already.


Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
Posted - 2008.11.24 07:40:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Kittamaru on 19/12/2008 13:03:22
Why don't you? You don't seem to get the point -

I'll make it as clear as possible:

CCP HAS SAID, CLEAR AS DAY, THEY INTEND TO INTRODUCE SOME MECHANIC TO PROVIDE A COUNTER TO CLOAKING.

Whether you agree with it or not, it's going to happen.

MY PLAN is to come up with an idea that, if implemented, will prevent cloaking from being over-nerfed and thus USELESS.

Edited for poor character on my part

WillageGirl
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium
Posted - 2008.11.24 08:25:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: WillageGirl on 24/11/2008 08:42:00
Originally by: Kittamaru
Why don't you? You don't seem to get the point -

I'll make it as clear as possible:

CCP HAS SAID, CLEAR AS DAY, THEY INTEND TO INTRODUCE SOME MECHANIC TO PROVIDE A COUNTER TO CLOAKING.

Whether you agree with it or not, it's going to happen.

MY PLAN is to come up with an idea that, if implemented, will prevent cloaking from being over-nerfed and thus USELESS.

Now, if you all want to loose your cov ops, recons, blockade runners, and other cloak-necessary ships, by all means, keep telling me to **** off. If you don't, start providing some constructive thought. Otherwise, when the sh*t hits the fan and cloaks have some god awful penalty to them, don't come crying to the forums. The more intelligent among us are trying to help you NOW.


The good book has said that there will be harmageddon!!!!

Now as you might have noticed, CCP has a bad habit of announcing projects that they are working on, years before planned deployment. (ok, mayb ea bit exaggerated) What these particular changes are most likely related to is the changes they have said there will be in local chat and the whole scanning system.

Now considering that we casual players have no idea how local and scanners are going to be changed, how is it that YOU think you will be able to form that ultimate plan to fit in that new environment? Maybe you know something the rest of us dont..? I think not.

My point is, saying that you have some divine right to call your idea the ultimate solution without knowing where and how it will be used is kinda like shooting moving target in pitch black and saying you got a bullseye with every shot.

If you want to talk about counters to cloak, which are really not needed in the current state of EvE-online, you should add the other features that have huge effect in this matter into your considerations.

EDIT:
You should also rething the whole scanning times in your idea. With the ones you got in there right now, most recons will just suffer a horrible death everytime someone is scanning at gate. Seriously, are you trying to kill AFK cloaking or all cloaking? Rolling Eyes


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (12)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

New Topic