The Amazing Technicolour Dream Cloak

Seeing as I like riffing on ideas, though my brain storms are usually limited to a light drizzle . . . this one is thanks to http://www.gamerchick.net

***************************

Mike snorted, listening to the argument at the next table.  Cloaking was one of the standard ways to get people to disagree.  He had heard the rounds of this for years, especially the disdain for the AFK cloaky camper and the laughter that wormholers had for anybody worried by them.

He tuned them out and opened his comms trying to find something to read while he ate his Key Lime pie.  He had developed a taste for it over the past year.  He almost inhaled a mouthful and choked a bit as the first article was echoing and expanding on the argument behind him.  He sipped his latte and refocused through his tears.  “Serendipity be workin overtime.”  he gasped and the decided to see what the author had to say.

[seriously, go read it]

Her article made him grin, the idea of differentiation of the definition of cloak, itself.  So many factors that could be played with, range, local, d’scan, visibility, or overview . . .  each of which would have its own benefits and drawbacks.  You might be able to layer them but they would have fitting limitations making total invisibility damn near impossible.  A pilot would have to make choices.

Then she went on to enumerate various ways to ‘beat’ cloaks.  Mike frowned, many of them had huge overpowering issues that would change a lot more than what they intended.  The EMP pulse, for instance.  If there were a weapon that turned off all active modules in range then you could kill a targets active tank before opening fire.  So many active systems were involved in such a broad access that . . . he shuddered.

He flipped back up to the many cloak idea and turned it over in more detail.  What if there WAS a module that let you stay out of local?  A fleet could ghost through enemy systems unless there was a guard on the gate watching the overview.  He chuckled.  That would make people even more nervous, of course they could d’scan as well.  But that would be so much WORK for some poor person quietly sitting in an Ishtar.

The nastiest cloak would be the Overview one.  Invisible unless they clicked on you visibly or you turned it off to activate a module.  Camera men and reporters of big fleets would love this.  Twitch folks would be able to be on site and not easily taken out.  Oh you can scan them, see them in local, just targeting would be tough.  A interceptor . . . would have a field day.  Mike shook his head.  Again the balance would be difficult to maintain but some of them would make for some very new tactics.

“But that ain’t happennin, even if it do be an interestin set of ideas.”  Mike paid out his bill with his comm leaving his usual tip and left quietly.  Having been teased about not letting people get a word in edgewise had made him try to listen a bit more and not always be the one with the story.  But being invisible was not his style . . .

*****************************************************************

Lessons

I do love seeing ideas tossed about and flipped over to see what they other side looks like.

Ignore the ‘should it be changed’ and take a look at ‘how COULD it be changed’

fly it like you won it, I give out a ship in the next two days.

m

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The Amazing Technicolour Dream Cloak

  1. RobAryeeArc says:

    Different types of cloaking could effect/affect [which ever is grammatically correct] local chat, overview, grid (visual), d-scan, probes but you could also link the strength of the cloak to the ship’s current speed. (0m/s=100% cloaked, x% of total m/s (where ‘x’ is > 0) = easier to visually see/d-scan/probe down)
    Although cloaks should work well camouflaging a ship from far away, if on grid with another ship there could some type of visual queue that ‘something is out there’ (like an after image used in a lot of anime series), which could be linked to the speed of the cloaked ship.
    Eve is all about customization and optimization so a variety of cloaking modules makes a lot of sense. At Fanfest 2014, CCP Fozzie stated they want more ships like stealth bombers which required the player to master the ship rather than relying on level 5 skills and F1. I think the issue of cloaking is a good opportunity to generate a new exclusive ship type gameplay specifically for hunting down cloaked ships.

  2. Lightstar says:

    It would be a hard one to balance,

    The one that made me chuckle most was someone once suggests a radial cloak, everything within a certain distance of a ship was cloaked, as was the ship. *Grins* take a moment to think about that…

    • mikeazariah says:

      I did and started shuddering

      m

    • Jon Illat says:

      Have you ever played C&C 3? The NOD have a cloaking structure that cloaks everything around it, but it is not cloaked itself. How about that as an idea, but on a ship? (Having another cloak overlapping the original doesn’t cloak it either).

      “It’s just one ship…”

      • Lightstar says:

        What came first, the alpha or the de-cloak?

        Plus given that ccp would probably put a targeting delay in they wouldn’t be much use. We’d have to call that one the sitting duck gambit.

  3. Unknown characters in local pose a threat but I’d prefer a solution that still allows me to run sites in hostile space and go afk/cloak when RL interrupts or hunters show up to camp the (dead-end) system I am in so I can’t log off without being scanned down or leave system without having to run a gatecamp.

    Not every cloaky is a hunter backed up by a cyno, some are prey or tourist. I think any change to cloaking wil go hand in hand with a change to local.

    Give me constellation/region chat with recent speakers instead of local system chat/list.
    Give me an improved dscan (auto refresh without buttton mashing, this is not some mario melee smash) that will show me player name instead of just the ship name so that I can still see who is nearby.
    This way you won’t see someone the second they enter system. The won’t show up until they are in Dscan range (and uncloaked? perhaps cloaking can hide either player name or ship type/name but not the fact someone is out there)

    • Jon Illat says:

      This is one of the issues that I have with any changes to cloaking. I sometimes go out to nullsec to do some exploration, and many times have been trapped in a system by a group that want to kill my ship. Waiting for 30 seconds uncloaked to get a safe log-off is not viable a lot of the time, as they have people with probes out, and so the only option is to stay cloaked and take a break for as long as it takes for them to lose interest. Also, RL does exist as you pointed out, and having to log-off for 5 minutes while I take a bio-break/make lunch/whatever would just be a pain, and potentially unviable if you had been shot at by gate rats within the last 5 minutes (15 minutes if you survived another person aggressing you).

      For ways that cloaking could be changed? I haven’t given it much thought, it’s an interesting concept. Having a special launcher that can scan down cloaked ships just means that it may take an extra few minutes while the person that can fit the launcher flies down to the system, and would not be fun for anyone trying to day-trip through nullsec.

      There is one thing that I think must be remembered by this quote though: ” the disdain for the AFK cloaky camper and the laughter that wormholers had for anybody worried by them.”

      You can’t light a cyno in WHs. If you have one SB in a WH, that’s nice, you just need to stick a scout on the entrance if you don’t already have one there, so you can see if they’re bringing in a sub-cap fleet or a few captials (3 max into a C5?). A cyno in nullsec (or lowsec for that matter) can result in a much larger problem for the inhabitants of the system, as you can get an entire fleet (or more) of capitals jumping through on-grid, with no prior warning except for “one neut in local”. I think WH dwellers would be more worried about knowing that there was a neutral in system with them if they knew that they could have a large fleet dropped on their heads at any time. Just my thoughts on the subject.

  4. Suzuka says:

    If a ‘solution’ is to be implemented I feel it would be best for that implementation to be/promote cat and mouse type gameplay to make sure (non-afk) cloaky campers can remain hidden in system.

    This, I feel, would be best implemented by introducing ‘EMP’ probes.

    Pros:
    – The probing/scanning system already exists.
    – It is proven people can avoid being scanned down if they are active (actively playing the game).
    – New item to be manufactured.
    – Another reason to train scanning/probing skills.
    – Leads to group/coordinated gameplay (see the Implementation section).

    Cons:
    – No more complete safety for afk cloakers.
    – Having to train scanning skills.
    – Best/most efficient if done in a group.

    Implementation:
    The EMP probes should have a *very limited range*. (This will lead to multiple people using the EMP probes at once to get max coverage and also having someone with combat probes standing by.)
    The user places the probes in a desired location and clicks scan, the probes move to the location and start a spool up process of __ seconds. (This is important because it guarantees active cloakers will have time to see the probes on d-scan and warp off to avoid them, hence cat and mouse games.) The result of being decloaked by the EMP probes should prevent recloaking for __ seconds to give time for combat probes to be deployed and used. Being ‘hit’ by a probe(s) can trigger a sound effect and/or animation if CCP wants to.

    How many simultaneous probes does it take to decloak a ship?
    1) A standardized __ probe hits or __ probes with __ points (meta variants) associated with it decloaks a ships.
    2) Base it off of the target ship’s sensor strength. (example: For every 5 points of sensor strength it takes 1x EMP probe to counteract it. Thus a ship with a sensor strength of 12 takes 3 EMP probes to decloak.)

    Special circumstances:
    – High sec, low sec, and WHs (It is very likely it would *not* be implemented in high sec and WH space.)
    – Gates/Wormholes/Jump Bridges (The ‘EMP’ probes should not work within __ km of entrances/exits of a system.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s