These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Please add a counter to bumping.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Verlai
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2013-02-27 01:15:03 UTC
This is a fantastic idea! I too would love to have a counter analogous to the ship spinning counter to keep track of how many times I've bumped a particular ship in a row.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#42 - 2013-02-27 01:18:36 UTC
Verlai wrote:
This is a fantastic idea! I too would love to have a counter analogous to the ship spinning counter to keep track of how many times I've bumped a particular ship in a row.

THIS

This is what I expected this thread was about.

I endorse this!

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Akara Ito
Phalanx Solutions
#43 - 2013-02-27 01:59:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Akara Ito
Being faster than the ship bumping you seems kind of a natural counter to me.

Bumping can also be quite an art, its not that easy to be both faster and heavier than your target and still hit it with precision.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-02-27 02:12:21 UTC
Akara Ito wrote:
Being faster than the ship bumping you seems kind of a natural counter to me.

Bumping can also be quite an art, its not that easy to be both faster and heavier than your target and still hit it with precision.


Confirming OP's freighter can be be faster than a cruiser. Ah, the IQ of a goon. Link that freighter fit?Big smile
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#45 - 2013-02-27 02:14:51 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Akara Ito wrote:
Being faster than the ship bumping you seems kind of a natural counter to me.

Bumping can also be quite an art, its not that easy to be both faster and heavier than your target and still hit it with precision.


Confirming OP's freighter can be be faster than a cruiser. Ah, the IQ of a goon. Link that freighter fit?Big smile


must have read the first line and then prematurely ejaculated his post.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#46 - 2013-02-27 05:16:32 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Akara Ito wrote:
Being faster than the ship bumping you seems kind of a natural counter to me.

Bumping can also be quite an art, its not that easy to be both faster and heavier than your target and still hit it with precision.


Confirming OP's freighter can be be faster than a cruiser. Ah, the IQ of a goon. Link that freighter fit?Big smile


This is how I fit my freighters, not sure about you guys...

[Charon, Dodger]
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#47 - 2013-02-27 22:38:34 UTC
Quintessen wrote:
loophole in the game's mechanics.


Just in case no one has said it yet.

"No it's not"
loophole is just another way of saying exploit and bumping is not an exploit.

the game's mechanics allow a pod to bump a titan(and affect it) when physics alone says this shouldn't be possible, the game's mechanics also stop that same pod from bumping something (and affecting it) if that item is anchored.

so bumping anything that's not anchored and affecting it in some way (trajectory, position, alignment, ect ect ect ) is in fact "Working as intended"


just saying.

o/
Celly

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#48 - 2013-02-27 22:45:15 UTC
Alana Charen-Teng wrote:


Physical accuracy is not a good justification for making changes to the game. After all, I think flying through planets is silly.


Warp drive theory suggests that by warping the space around you, passing through solid objects is a possibility, additionally, I have long suspected some minute form of phase shifting from the warp drive so that space dust doesn't rip your hull to shreads as you warp, so even that makes warping through a planet possible and acceptable.



ok, I'll shut up now. :)

o/
Celly

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
#49 - 2013-03-01 09:36:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Super spikinator
Mike Whiite wrote:
The best way to arange a counter is by, making it a real mechanic.

Ramming ships \o/

Though that would require a physics make over, again something i'd cheer for.

would makes mass somthing that has a positive side as well.

and would give a bonus to armor tankers against Shield tankers.





ramming ships would make miner ganking even easier. It would mean that a single stabber with a 100MN AB (or 100MN MWD if you want to play powergrid tetris) could possibly king hit a mackinaw. That pulls costs down considerably!
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#50 - 2013-03-01 10:00:16 UTC
bumping is bullplop.

how can a frigate bump a BS or cap ship?

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#51 - 2013-03-01 13:07:13 UTC
Super spikinator wrote:
Mike Whiite wrote:
The best way to arange a counter is by, making it a real mechanic.

Ramming ships \o/

Though that would require a physics make over, again something i'd cheer for.

would makes mass somthing that has a positive side as well.

and would give a bonus to armor tankers against Shield tankers.





ramming ships would make miner ganking even easier. It would mean that a single stabber with a 100MN AB (or 100MN MWD if you want to play powergrid tetris) could possibly king hit a mackinaw. That pulls costs down considerably!



why, if you bring in real physics, a miner could take cover withing the asteroid belt, the rammer should navigate his way through those before he can pick up speed to ram a ship.

I'm not aware what the mass of a Miniing ship is, because it should be something that must be taken in account, if you shoot a bullit at a steel door the bullet will be of worse than the door.

It would not be something that should be brought in the game without thinking, but I would cheer the fought of more physics in EVE. hitting a structure should do something.

Yes there will be obstacles (undocking, criminal flag or not and a few others, though I think there could be a solutions for those) the undock 30 sec untachable could count or colisions as well, there could be more undock gates or you should ask clearance or undocking first.

criminal flagging is harder, because at what time are you accdedently brushing someone and when are you ramming it. maybe you should give a command like aproach, and leave the damage done by crashing lower, or you might want to do something with the safety buttom when it's on ships will outomaticly stear away from eachother.

afin like I said it need to be thought through, and tested first but I think it would be a asset to EVE.

for a unforgiving world it lets you get away with a lot o bad piloting.

it also leaves room or a couple of other moduls, a ram, a propulsion mod that would let you fly back wards, for manuevarbillity in asteroid ields and the like.

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2013-03-01 14:15:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentamon
Mag's wrote:
Bumping is a perfectly legitimate mechanic to use. There are counters, but they require team mates and imagination.


Fair enough, if bumping required team mates and imagination. Clearly it doesn't. It's a solo activity that can be done in the cheapest of ships with zero risk to the aggressor. You rarely get more broken then this.

Some sort of hull damage on collision would be my preference but there will be much rage over this.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2013-03-01 14:24:08 UTC
The Trade Hub issue is another one that could be easily fixed.

Space stations could use tractor beams on nearby ships for traffic control, not let them fly around as they wish. This would fix another problem of ships getting hung up in station geometry when trying to warp and the really ugly looking clipping that you see when ships fly through the station.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Beckie DeLey
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-03-01 15:23:38 UTC
Verlai wrote:
This is a fantastic idea! I too would love to have a counter analogous to the ship spinning counter to keep track of how many times I've bumped a particular ship in a row.


/thread

My siren's name is Brick and she is the prettiest.
Vin King
State War Academy
Caldari State
#55 - 2013-03-01 15:26:40 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bumping is a perfectly legitimate mechanic to use. There are counters, but they require team mates and imagination.


Fair enough, if bumping required team mates and imagination. Clearly it doesn't. It's a solo activity that can be done in the cheapest of ships with zero risk to the aggressor. You rarely get more broken then this.

Some sort of hull damage on collision would be my preference but there will be much rage over this.


Popping Ventures that float into LowSec is a solo activity with zero risk to the aggressor. Is that broken, too? Also, hull damage on collision would be used in our favor, not the other way around. We'd watch an orbiting mining barge, park in the path, wait for entertainment.

Proud member of the New Order of HighSec
androch
LitlCorp
#56 - 2013-03-01 16:10:47 UTC
its called orbit... know it, love it, use it sheesh some people are just lazy
Mag's
Azn Empire
#57 - 2013-03-01 17:13:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Sentamon wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bumping is a perfectly legitimate mechanic to use. There are counters, but they require team mates and imagination.


Fair enough, if bumping required team mates and imagination. Clearly it doesn't. It's a solo activity that can be done in the cheapest of ships with zero risk to the aggressor. You rarely get more broken then this.

Some sort of hull damage on collision would be my preference but there will be much rage over this.
Maybe I should have added an 'or' to that post, for those who obviously haven't read and/or comprehended the thread.

Yes solo players can bump, but also solo player can use counters to bumping. Hull size matters in this regard.
In fact the size of the hull is a factor for both sides, if the bumped ships are intended to be popped. If they are not, there is no aggression.

So nothing is broken, unless the bad idea of collision damage was introduced.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#58 - 2013-03-01 18:52:54 UTC
I hope you realize that in most solar systems in space you could just shoot the bumper and be done with it. In hisec your freedom is always restricted by the very same rules that you want/need/think you need to protect you.

Rulesets in a game, where rules are enforced by unerring mechanics (as opposed to RL where enforcing is uncertain and flexible, case by case), are practically impossible to design to be exploit-free. It's an inherent issue of any ruleset created by humans for humans, and becomes ever more complex along with increase system features.

Consider this: You have a small group of humans, with limited time and predictive measures creating rules. Then you have an exponentially larger group of humans with all the time in the world trying to find loopholes and workarounds in these rules. Should be doable, when the context is say, two players moving 6 different types of pieces on an 8-by-8 two-dimensional grid, and clear, concrete objective. Hell, even a computer can find loopholes and exploits in a system by simply crunching numbers :)

Then consider a virtual universe consisting of 7500 solar systems spread across 3 main intertwined areas of basic ROE, hundreds of thousands of players with as many completely arbitrary and even abstract objectives, hundreds of different pieces and a gigantic number of different configurations for them- then tell me that the smaller group of humans can design the rules so that all these different players can chase their objectives in reasonably balances way for a decade, when most factors in the game are in constant flux, and realize that CCP has done a stellar job, and realize that every new rule has the potential to send the whole system into an uncontrollable spin.

And at the very least creates ever more complexity.

tl,dr; hisec ROE are a game designer's nightmare and I'm surprised that it doesn't cause more grief to it's inhabitants than it currently does.

I chose to live outside the law for the sake of my sanity and well-being, it's just more simple and fun to play by the laws of the jungle:

If you attack me and I survive, I will kill you. If I die, you are forgiven.

The biggest gain from taking your well-being into your own hands is freedom. I guess I'l never understand people who play a science fiction game as immortal demigods, and choose to be bound by stupid laws like in RL, instead of flying free, as masters of their own destiny.

.
Vin King
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-03-01 19:16:44 UTC
Roime wrote:
In hisec your freedom is always restricted by the very same rules that you want/need/think you need to protect you.


This is one of the most amusing aspects of the entire New Order. Our invulnerability comes from the exact mechanisms that people have whined for in HighSec to protect them all this time. It has created a safety net that stops them from doing anything to us.

Proud member of the New Order of HighSec
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2013-03-01 19:53:42 UTC
Super spikinator wrote:
Mike Whiite wrote:
The best way to arange a counter is by, making it a real mechanic.

Ramming ships \o/

Though that would require a physics make over, again something i'd cheer for.

would makes mass somthing that has a positive side as well.

and would give a bonus to armor tankers against Shield tankers.





ramming ships would make miner ganking even easier. It would mean that a single stabber with a 100MN AB (or 100MN MWD if you want to play powergrid tetris) could possibly king hit a mackinaw. That pulls costs down considerably!


How is one stabber cheaper than one catalyst?Roll