These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

At what point is something an Exploit and not game Mechanics ? Bumped for 60 Minutes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1061 - 2013-07-07 13:44:03 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I would like to point out that a freighter load of trit is not a gank worthy target.


You forget that these are members of the "time I spend is free" crowd, so the fact that you can, theoretically kill a freighter for under 100m is magically relevant to them.


"Theoretically"? It's regularly done with 30 cats valued <1.5m. Factoring in a full load of trit, a 50% drop rate, and a 34-way split, that's still ~20m/hr/person.... for ganking a load of trit.

Historically, high sec piracy is not supposed to be that consistently profitable.


At a base level, no. CCP can't account for what people are going to stuff in their cargohold though.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1062 - 2013-07-07 13:48:41 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
The mack is almost as big as a freighter.


Tenth of the mass though.... unless you mean the mackinaw, in which case a 50th.


A little under a tenth, a little under half when the MWD is active. A freighter does around 80ms, a Machariel can easily do 1600 with sub-optimal skills.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
firepup82
The Inf3cted
Pathog3n
#1063 - 2013-07-07 13:50:15 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


At that speed it would punch a hole in the freighter, destroying both ships & the resulting debris would cause a lot of destruction as a result. Do you people even think before you come up with these ideas? A piece of space dust traveling at speed is a threat in the real world.


Silly goon now your getting into collision damage which has nothing to do with topic at hand why do you think I said bounce not explode.. and I'm gonna go ahead and goes there are air locked compartments in the freighter whych would not destroy both. But your analogy proves my point. A puce if space dust is a threat to insta kill a pilot that price of dust cannot hit a ship and make it bounce off of it
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1064 - 2013-07-07 13:59:48 UTC
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


At that speed it would punch a hole in the freighter, destroying both ships & the resulting debris would cause a lot of destruction as a result. Do you people even think before you come up with these ideas? A piece of space dust traveling at speed is a threat in the real world.


Silly goon now your getting into collision damage which has nothing to do with topic at hand why do you think I said bounce not explode.. and I'm gonna go ahead and goes there are air locked compartments in the freighter whych would not destroy both. But your analogy proves my point. A puce if space dust is a threat to insta kill a pilot that price of dust cannot hit a ship and make it bounce off of it


You suggested to bring in real world physics, so collision has a lot to do with it, or are you going to tell me that asteroids bounce off the surface of larger asteroids & do exactly zero damage?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#1065 - 2013-07-07 14:00:22 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
The mack is almost as big as a freighter.


Tenth of the mass though.... unless you mean the mackinaw, in which case a 50th.


A little under a tenth, a little under half when the MWD is active. A freighter does around 80ms, a Machariel can easily do 1600 with sub-optimal skills.


A 7th by my math (how do you figure half)?

Assuming elastic that looks like ~1.3k for the Mach ~360 for the freighter
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1066 - 2013-07-07 14:11:11 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
The mack is almost as big as a freighter.


Tenth of the mass though.... unless you mean the mackinaw, in which case a 50th.


A little under a tenth, a little under half when the MWD is active. A freighter does around 80ms, a Machariel can easily do 1600 with sub-optimal skills.


A 7th by my math (how do you figure half)?

Assuming elastic that looks like ~1.3k for the Mach ~360 for the freighter


I was thinking of the wrong penalty. A little over a 7th is more accurate. Even so, someone is trying to say that a pointy object travelling at 1600ms hitting a larger object on a flatter surface traveling at 80ms will just bounce off... He wants real world physics, but only partially.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#1067 - 2013-07-07 14:19:47 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
I was thinking of the wrong penalty. A little over a 7th is more accurate. Even so, someone is trying to say that a pointy object travelling at 1600ms hitting a larger object on a flatter surface traveling at 80ms will just bounce off... He wants real world physics, but only partially.


Hard to say what a "very hard, yet bendable" fictitious metal would do. I find the warp requirements more wacky personally.
firepup82
The Inf3cted
Pathog3n
#1068 - 2013-07-07 14:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: firepup82
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


At that speed it would punch a hole in the freighter, destroying both ships & the resulting debris would cause a lot of destruction as a result. Do you people even think before you come up with these ideas? A piece of space dust traveling at speed is a threat in the real world.


Silly goon now your getting into collision damage which has nothing to do with topic at hand why do you think I said bounce not explode.. and I'm gonna go ahead and goes there are air locked compartments in the freighter whych would not destroy both. But your analogy proves my point. A puce if space dust is a threat to insta kill a pilot that price of dust cannot hit a ship and make it bounce off of it


You suggested to bring in real world physics, so collision has a lot to do with it, or are you going to tell me that asteroids bounce off the surface of larger asteroids & do exactly zero damage?


Guess I am talking to a goon. I thought I was clear common sense is lacking these days though u physics and collision DAMAGE are 2 different things I figured when I said bump instead of crash into common sense would kick in

Edit
And its know there us no collision damage in eve and never will be this topic is not about collision damage its about bumping and the physics involved in that if there was collision damage this would not be a topic again.. common sense I thought would kick in here but again this is about bumping not collision. I'd be glad to discuss that but make a new topic
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1069 - 2013-07-07 14:52:32 UTC
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


At that speed it would punch a hole in the freighter, destroying both ships & the resulting debris would cause a lot of destruction as a result. Do you people even think before you come up with these ideas? A piece of space dust traveling at speed is a threat in the real world.


Silly goon now your getting into collision damage which has nothing to do with topic at hand why do you think I said bounce not explode.. and I'm gonna go ahead and goes there are air locked compartments in the freighter whych would not destroy both. But your analogy proves my point. A puce if space dust is a threat to insta kill a pilot that price of dust cannot hit a ship and make it bounce off of it


You suggested to bring in real world physics, so collision has a lot to do with it, or are you going to tell me that asteroids bounce off the surface of larger asteroids & do exactly zero damage?


Guess I am talking to a goon. I thought I was clear common sense is lacking these days though u physics and collision DAMAGE are 2 different things I figured when I said bump instead of crash into common sense would kick in

Edit
And its know there us no collision damage in eve and never will be this topic is not about collision damage its about bumping and the physics involved in that if there was collision damage this would not be a topic again.. common sense I thought would kick in here but again this is about bumping not collision. I'd be glad to discuss that but make a new topic


could you please flesh out your ideas for "realistic" physics in a game where ships have a maximum velocity?
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1070 - 2013-07-07 14:54:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


At that speed it would punch a hole in the freighter, destroying both ships & the resulting debris would cause a lot of destruction as a result. Do you people even think before you come up with these ideas? A piece of space dust traveling at speed is a threat in the real world.


Silly goon now your getting into collision damage which has nothing to do with topic at hand why do you think I said bounce not explode.. and I'm gonna go ahead and goes there are air locked compartments in the freighter whych would not destroy both. But your analogy proves my point. A puce if space dust is a threat to insta kill a pilot that price of dust cannot hit a ship and make it bounce off of it


You suggested to bring in real world physics, so collision has a lot to do with it, or are you going to tell me that asteroids bounce off the surface of larger asteroids & do exactly zero damage?


Guess I am talking to a goon. I thought I was clear common sense is lacking these days though u physics and collision DAMAGE are 2 different things I figured when I said bump instead of crash into common sense would kick in


In regards to ramming something at speed you don't get one without the other (common sense right?) & real physics dictates that your ship travelling at 1600ms will not just simply 'bounce' off the target. You're the one that suggested real physics so I gave you an example of what that idea would entail. This is why EVE doesn't use real physics.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1071 - 2013-07-07 15:20:58 UTC
Now that I think on it, the mack should be a better hauler than freighters. Its about as big as a freighter but only a tenth of the mass. That means it has some vast cavities inside it...
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#1072 - 2013-07-07 15:53:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Now that I think on it, the mack should be a better hauler than freighters. Its about as big as a freighter but only a tenth of the mass. That means it has some vast cavities inside it...


Freighter is 117x the volume... supposedly.
Pitrolo Orti
Doomheim
#1073 - 2013-07-07 18:02:56 UTC
This thread is going places!

Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1074 - 2013-07-07 18:44:13 UTC
Pitrolo Orti wrote:
This thread is going places!


Indeed. The same places every other thread regarding the suicide ganking of freighters have been.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#1075 - 2013-07-07 19:19:59 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
firepup82 wrote:
Want a quick fix? Especially all u its physics its physics BS it is implement real physics.. and that tells us if a be carenes into a freighter its should have almost no effect due to real world physics a fly " the Machs" cannot bump a semi " the freighter" problem solved and please you who are shouting physics if u have half a brain u know if this was real physics the freighter mach would bounce off the freighter like bowling pins to a 50lb bowling ball


Since, in the real world, collisions are based on Momentum or Energy (you can do the math either way and it comes out the same), and Momentum equals Mass*Velocity, and Energy equals Mass*Velocity^2, what do you think would happen when something 1/7th the mass of your ship but having a Velocity 40 times greater hits your ship? How about something 1/16th the mass, but with a velocity 144 times greater?

Bump Machs, and Bump SFIs have significantly higher Momentums and Energies than Freighters do. That means that, if we were to use real world physics (and assume everything's indestructible), they'd bump the everloving hell out of a Freighter on impact.

The reason this doesn't work with a Semi is that the Semi is latched onto the ground, an advantage that a Spaceship does not have.


Oh, and show me a fly that's either 1/7th or 1/16th the mass of a Semi.

And, of course, there's the issue of real spaceships having maximum accelerations, not maximum velocities, and the many other things that make our submarine simulator great.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#1076 - 2013-07-08 10:27:42 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
S Byerley you have STILL not told me how it would be possible to differentiate between the two situations I proposed about 15 pages ago.

You continually ignore these straight forward situations because you bloody well know what you're saying isn't valid. Your arguments have been utterly shredded, and yet you still persist, simply ignoring the fact that what you've said has been systematically pulled apart


No you see ... because some dictionaries define the word by stating the concept of intent in words other than using intent explicitly, it doesn't mean intent is implied!

And, because there's a fraction of doubt over whether CCP have accepted the common legal definition (where there needs to be both intent and impact to be deemed harassment, tort alone does not imply the crime) we must clearly conclude the exact opposite: that CCP ignore intent and have a hidden secret threshold and judge solely based on that.
This is roughly equivalent to the "Well, I can see a slight hole in your otherwise complete fossil record, therefore CREATIONISM".

Also a study in 2012 that showed an inability to be useful with regards to these scenarios is apparently good proof it was possible 40 years ago.

S Byerley, everyone.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#1077 - 2013-07-08 11:44:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Falls under his description of harassment though:

"However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis."
He hasn't made an effort to move to another location, and they weren't following him around, so no.

Quote:
Judging on a case to case basis is silly; better to adjust the mechanic so you can't completely disable someone in that manner.
How is he being completely disabled? And no, all kind of harassment must be judged on a case-by-case basis. Not that bumping someone away from a gate qualifies…



Tippia, seriously sometimes you talk such rubbish Roll

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1078 - 2013-07-08 14:34:34 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm going to take a chance and call you a liar. In fact, I will attempt to prove this tonight once I get home. I am going to take 2 of my accounts, and try to see which one gets the aggression timer first.

Both will be flying a freighter.

If I am able to get one to kill the other, I will correct myself and say you were right.

What's your side of the wager?


My side of the wager is that I am right and you don't understand the mechanics. You're misunderstanding what the time means - it does not mean "I pulled the trigger on someone else" it means "I was involved in an act of aggression in some way" - that includes being on the receiving end

hope this helps



My point is, is that it shouldn't.

Just being a victim shouldn't warrant a timer. This has been mentioned quite a few times that is an opinion and also a suggestion, not a fact (which is why we are all players discussing it).

Seriously, pay attention.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1079 - 2013-07-08 14:42:52 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm going to take a chance and call you a liar. In fact, I will attempt to prove this tonight once I get home. I am going to take 2 of my accounts, and try to see which one gets the aggression timer first.

Both will be flying a freighter.

If I am able to get one to kill the other, I will correct myself and say you were right.

What's your side of the wager?


You won't gain an agression timer unless they are shot at by another player. Freighters are already special in this regard (due to being unable to fit offensive weaponry) but you, for some unknown reason, think they should be even more special. Good luck on spending several hours later proving exactly what we've been telling you though.



Thank you for confirming what I've been trying to say. I just wanted acknowledgement that freighters were not "like any other ship".

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#1080 - 2013-07-08 14:44:30 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm going to take a chance and call you a liar. In fact, I will attempt to prove this tonight once I get home. I am going to take 2 of my accounts, and try to see which one gets the aggression timer first.

Both will be flying a freighter.

If I am able to get one to kill the other, I will correct myself and say you were right.

What's your side of the wager?


My side of the wager is that I am right and you don't understand the mechanics. You're misunderstanding what the time means - it does not mean "I pulled the trigger on someone else" it means "I was involved in an act of aggression in some way" - that includes being on the receiving end

hope this helps



My point is, is that it shouldn't.

Just being a victim shouldn't warrant a timer. This has been mentioned quite a few times that is an opinion and also a suggestion, not a fact (which is why we are all players discussing it).

Seriously, pay attention.


Why on Earth shouldn't it warrant a timer? Not incurring one pretty much means anyone in high hp ships can pull the plug to save themselves from attacks. This is a bloody horrific idea, and will be abused to hell and back (like it used to be, and is literally why CCP changed it in the first place)