EVE General Discussion

I seriously doubt that the aggression timer was put into place so that players with trial accounts can sit there and take pot shots at a defenseless freighter to keep it from logging off. The way the timer is working you could literally take a rookie ship and tie up a freighter for an indefinite amount of time. I really don't think this was the effect that CCP had intended when they implemented the aggression timers.


CONCORD is a mechanic that was placed into the game to give players a layer of protection when in empire space. If players choose to loose there ship to CONCORD by ganking haulers off a gate that's fine the way I see it. Those players are aware of the consequences of there actions and are prepared to pay the price, but when you bump a ship out of CONCORDs range with the expressive intention of breaking the CONCORD defense mechanic that is an exploit.

In both of the situations outlined above, the mechanics placed in game are broken and I would be very surprised if they are functioning as intended.

You can sugar coat all you want but at the end of the day a spade is still a spade. These are some of the reasons I moved into W-space is to avoid the asshattery that is K-space.

luring them on gird is the only way i had to save myself and i did . the first time . after that the xploiters win

Add collision damage. Youll stop bumping into things eventually as you see your ship go *pop*. Don't make one bump enough to damage a ship a lot, just make a bunch in a certain time frame add up to killing yourself.

sounds plausible in high sec only and to people you cant legitimately kill anyway. non war targets . But then theres the whole repping mechanic. how would that work into this ? I smell a goon workaround !

CCP will have to make a decision on this subject in short time as there are multiple petitions in about Bumping which is = to a focused warp disruption script for a capital without a jump drive.
Add that to the fact that it serves a dual purpose
1 warp scrambling
2 getting it out of range of gate guns and concord

Jedijed's case may be viewed a little differently than most due to the amount of time they held him there .
When they answer the petition We will all have the final answer.

Here's my 0.02 isk worth:

1.) Bumping the ship while forming up a fleet to gank it sucks for the bumped, but is still a legitimate tactic. Panicking and logging off was a bad move, and should be punished appropriately!!!

2.) When the pilot logged back in, his ship was in a state of perpetual (attempting to warp) that could not be cancelled. This is very, very problematic, as the freighter is essentially stuck. Otherwise the freighter could have attempted to warp to some location (inline) with a good/bad bump.

3.) I thought there was a double log off trick that allowed you to "escape" from these situations... Does that not work anymore? Does anyone know the details of how that worked?

They did make a decision.

I really don't get how people posting in this thread (where the decision has been repeatedly quoted or linked to) still are saying "CCP need to look at this"

CCP took several weeks looking into the issue of bumping and concluded that it was a normal application of game mechanics, as intended, and that doing so was not an exploit in any form.

I highly suggest you read the material in question so you are no longer asking CCP to do something they have already done.

e: also you can escape from being bumped, so no equating it to an infinite point is rather silly.

That's the problem. It shouldn't apply to freighters at all. As mentioned before it was used for capiltals that people tried to bug out on and couldn't.

Since freighters are not used for any of the same abuses the logoff factor of the aggression timers, it shouldn't apply, right?

what about a more "legitimate" pvp situation, like a freighter transporting an ihub in nullsec?

key word being nullsec

u wouldnt need to bumpo a war target but once maybe twice but keyword here is WAR TARGET