Perma cloaking impossible now? (2.5% over the chamber limit?)

    Benevolent27

    Join the Dark Side
    Joined
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages
    585
    Reaction score
    327
    • Purchased!
    Just a few thoughts here.

    Whether allowing permacloak/jam is intended or not, there is a rebalance necessary with the new chamber system and how the radarjamming/cloaking effects work. The mechanics work differently now. Scanning no longer "decloaks" an enemy for all to see. Only the person scanning can see the nearby cloaked ship, and only while their scanner is running. In addition, is it true that much larger ships can now cloak? In systems 1.0, only rather small ships could actually pull off cloaking and only if they were 80% weight in power blocks. Then can systems 2.0 ships also fire weapons while cloak is on? Systems 1.0 ships would immediately decloak if they tried. How powerful is a systems 2.0 permacloak ship in relation to a systems 1.0 ship? This must be considered.

    About cloaking, it renders you untargetable to AI. You do NOT need to have radarjam on for AI to not see you. Your nav marker is still visible, but they ignore it. However, other players can still see your nav marker and can target you with select-fire turrets. Radarjam, on the other hand, will prevent other players from targeting you with select-fire turrets, but AI can still fire at you, albeit with less accuracy (supposed to be, but does it work? Needs testing!).

    The question is, is it actually best not to allow permacloak/jammed ships because it would be OP with the new mechanics? I don't know the answer to that right now, but it is a good question.

    On LvD, when the bugs are fixed that prevent implementing EffectConfig.xml changes for multiplayer servers (*cough* Lancake T2892), I plan on combing through every chamber system and rebalancing it to allow more inclusiveness and choices during combat as much as possible, allowing the BASE level active-effects for most ships. I would like the radarjam and cloak effect to BE different active-effects though rather than being mashed together as they are now. My preference would be to make it follow a similar structure to how it was before, where the limit was less on what could be added to a ship and more about what was actually practical for the ship's power reactor to support. For example, a ship might have permajam and cloak, but maybe the power reactor doesn't produce enough power to run both for very long if their efficiency isn't upgraded. But perhaps, small ships WOULD have the capability to power both at the same time even without upgrades. I would consider different upgrade paths though, so maybe a person with a somewhat larger ship could do 2 things at once IF their power efficiency was upgraded. So they could thrust and cloak, but not jam. OR maybe jam and cloak, but not thrust or fire their weapons. If they upgraded their power boost effect, then perhaps they can do 3 things at once! Or maybe an even larger ship could permacloak/jam, but not do anything else while they are cloaked/jammed (to ambush other players). But I think if I make it easier to attain radarjam and cloak, then people also need to be able to include competent scanners on their ship.

    There's a lot of ways to go about balancing jam/cloak. LvD is a PvP server, so our focus might be different than a PvE server, which might end up with a config where a person cloaking is very difficult to attain but jamming is easier (because who wants a player to be able to permacloak and kill endless NPC's without any drawback?).
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Dec 5, 2014
    Messages
    113
    Reaction score
    37
    Also with power 2.0 shooting does uncloak you. It doesn't unjam you though. Also, please keep in mind that for a ship to be able to perma-cloak, you need to invest all your reactor capacity in this tree. So, basically what you get is a first strike. You can have the same with a jammer only + a range advantage compared to your target. Idk how it will play out balancing-wise, this indeed needs much more testing. At the moment i dont see much of a problem with perma-cloakers, since there is a counter to it, if you invest heavily into scanning skills of your ship. If you get perma scanning + max scan strength you end up using 62.5% reactor capacity, which means, you can hard counter a cloaker and you still have capacity left to get even more of an edge.
     
    Last edited:

    Benevolent27

    Join the Dark Side
    Joined
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages
    585
    Reaction score
    327
    • Purchased!
    Also with power 2.0 shooting does uncloak you. It doesn't unjam you though. Also, please keep in mind that for a ship to be able to perma-cloak, you need to invest all your reactor capacity in this tree. So, basically what you get is a first strike. You can have the same with a jammer only + a range advantage compared to your target. Idk how it will play out balancing-wise, this indeed needs much more testing. At the moment i dont see much of a problem with perma-cloakers, since there is a counter to it, if you invest heavily into scanning skills of your ship. If you get perma scanning + max scan strength you end up using 62.5% reactor capacity, which means, you can hard counter a cloaker and you still have capacity left to get even more of an edge.
    Have you tried to upgrade your scan to max strength in systems 2.0? You'll notice something interesting about it. The strength corresponds to the level of power reactor the enemy has. So larger ships have a higher level. If your scan strength is below the level of the enemy reactor, it doesn't work. HOWEVER, you cannot simply fully level your scan strength, because the power requirements quickly become too much, even for rather large ships. The power requirements do not scale based on the size of your own reactor, but are instead flat scaling. I'm having a bit of trouble finding where I actually recorded the needed power/sec for each scan level, but it's something like this:

    Level 1: 2k e/sec
    Level 2: 4k e/sec
    Level 3: 8k e/sec
    ...
    Level 7: 50m e/sec

    So basically, unless your ship produces at least 50m e/sec (and uses power for NOTHING ELSE), then it's simply impossible to have a max level scanner. You can only upgrade your scanner level to the size your reactor is big enough to support.
     
    Joined
    Dec 5, 2014
    Messages
    113
    Reaction score
    37
    yeah, i noticed yesterday, when a neutral entered my sys with a jammed ship and my minimum size max strength scanner ship didnt unjam him. If perma cloaking is possible again in an updated build with similar capacity cost, you could only support stealth strength 3 max anyway without being over 100% reactor capacity, so you wouldnt even need a maxed out scanner. You could go for scanner strength 3 and maybe invest some points into power cost efficiency. Besides uncloaking the perma-cloaker, you also get to know its weak spot when you scanned it. Still, I'm really hoping that 1 out of 3 things will be changed to fix that issue:
    1st: Make uncloaking/-jamming independent from reactor level (since only the scanning ship can see the cloaked one anyway, uncloaking a 5k mass ship with a 25 mass mini scanner wouldn't help being able to fight it anyway)
    2nd: Make scanning cost much less power
    3rd: Make Cloaking cost more power than scanning

    Since Perma Cloaking isnt possible atm, im only using perma-jammers. So idk the exact numbers of power cost for cloakers. But my 7k mass frigate is at about 60% power usage when perma-jamming, without moving, charging the jump drive, recharging shields, or using weapons. So im guessing it would be much more expensive for cloakers or if the ship/reactor was bigger. I think we can only answer this question once power 2.0 is kinda polished and the power cost is balanced.
    In theory though, perma-cloaking shouldn't be op because of the reasons in my last post.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Jan 10, 2015
    Messages
    17
    Reaction score
    11
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    Did you actually read the thread ?
    While I appreciate the response, please understand that I was asking for an update on this issue.

    It's well known that the cloaking spec is supposed to include jamming (per Lancake's post) but this change hasn't been implemented yet. I was hoping to find more information about the status of this issue, since, at present, it seems to only need to be published in the next update.

    Put simply:
    1) Is there a current work-around I'm missing?

    2) What is the status of this fix? Is it coming in the next update? Or has it been lost in the depths of SMD?

    3) Assuming that it will be fixed, am I safe to continue R&D, or will something else related to RC and this bug throw me back to square one?

    Cheers,
    Falcon One
     
    Joined
    Jul 10, 2013
    Messages
    626
    Reaction score
    486
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 7
    Oops sorry; I'll check on the phab if i can find that issue.
    Damm ! couldn't find anything. maybe i'm really bad at searching tho...
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Dec 5, 2014
    Messages
    113
    Reaction score
    37
    Benevolent27 :

    I just tested it with a mate. Ships don't need to have the same reactor size or bigger to scan a cloaked/jammed ship. My friend was able to see the nav marker of my 44k mass ship with a tiny ~25 mass scout :)