These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

An Anti-bumping Module for The Miners of High Sec

Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#21 - 2013-10-27 05:59:23 UTC
I wonder why miners are so bad at protecting themselves. They are without doubt the least adaptable pilots in the galaxy.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#22 - 2013-10-27 06:34:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
baltec1 wrote:
I wonder why miners are so bad at protecting themselves. They are without doubt the least adaptable pilots in the galaxy.


I wonder if miners cried so much before they had barges to do their mining in.
Solhild
Doomheim
#23 - 2013-10-27 11:57:32 UTC
A mid slot version of the Bastion module sounds like just the thing. Increases resists when active, needs lots of skills to fit, anchors ship in place.
Jureth22
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2013-10-27 12:23:48 UTC
you mean an anti bump module for the multibox,bots miners?
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#25 - 2013-10-27 12:28:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Solhild wrote:
A mid slot version of the Bastion module sounds like just the thing. Increases resists when active, needs lots of skills to fit, anchors ship in place.


You are clearly misunderstanding. This anti-bumping module would decrease your tank (and your yield) when active, not increase it. The whole point is to make you choose between being bumpable or being easily gankable, not giving you increased resistance to both.
Industrial Production Toon
Neptune PVP Corporation
#26 - 2013-10-27 12:35:25 UTC
love this thread, one idea which stirred a hornets nest =)

i do like the original poster having his say of "i saw multiple miner tear threads and i thought..." yet futher down the line "i just think it would make for more hillarious ganks..."

To add to the 2 main things i think it should have aswell (suspect flag and it as a high slot) they should make it fire off fireworks if someone gets within 2500m...

Possibly a rainbow over the ship?

OR...

A massive hologram of a carebear above the anchored ship?!
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#27 - 2013-10-27 12:59:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
I don't support the notion of it using a highslot. Just make it have a penalty on mining yield when active. Same effect.

If you make it flag Suspect when activated then nobody will activate it. I stick with my notion of making it flag Weapons though, to prevent the user from docking or jumping system for a full minute after it's deactivated. A minute isn't much, I know, but there are still times when my Weapons flag on SiSi hasn't quite worn off yet and I'm sitting outside a station/stargate for two or three seconds.

As for how to determine if a ship has this active.. well. Perhaps it could be an effect over the surface of the ship, much like reppers and hardeners.. except red. To my knowledge nothing uses a red effect. Then you'll be able to see clearly who the easier-than-normal kills are.
Miss Monty
Doomheim
#28 - 2013-10-27 13:03:17 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I don't support the notion of it using a highslot. Just make it have a penalty on mining yield when active. Same effect.

If you make it flag Suspect when activated then nobody will activate it. I stick with my notion of making it flag Weapons though, to prevent the user from docking or jumping system for a full minute after it's deactivated. A minute isn't much, I know, but there are still times when my Weapons flag on SiSi hasn't quite worn off yet and I'm sitting outside a station/stargate for two or three seconds.

As for how to determine if a ship has this active.. well. Perhaps it could be an effect over the surface of the ship, much like reppers and hardeners.. except red. To my knowledge nothing uses a red effect. Then you'll be able to see clearly who the easier-than-normal kills are.



+1 to a good idea.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#29 - 2013-10-27 16:07:23 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
I wonder why miners are so bad at protecting themselves. They are without doubt the least adaptable pilots in the galaxy.

You have to be present to be somewhat effective at self-preservation...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#30 - 2013-10-27 16:19:34 UTC
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:
...This is the kind of bullshit I see in F&I that makes me want to gouge out my own eyes.

Miner bumping is a legitimate and hilarious way to mess with AFK miners. Anti-bumping measures already exist - they're called orbiting, keeping at range, and having someone on hand to web you down.


Webs don't work against bumps, they only reduce your possible full speed, something which the bumping mechanic ignores.

Orbiting works *in theory* but not always.


This module, however, is useless. No miner will do anything to reduce their yield, as evidenced by the fact that there are STILL miners that DON'T TANK THEIR MACKINAWS despite the fact it wouldn't hurt their yield at all.

Darwinism in action.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Wapu Kashuken
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#31 - 2013-10-28 00:34:21 UTC
Sounds like another knee-jerk reaction to whiners (oops.... 'miners').

2 currently available methods to reduce bumping affect:

1) orbit (great for ice mining). Makes it harder to bump & ship automatically recovers distance bumped.

2) keep at distance. Automatically recovers distance when bumped.
Sally Enviere
#32 - 2013-10-29 10:32:22 UTC
More simpler solution is I think that it shouldn't count as a move command, and be able to safely logoff. The point is for miner bumping to make the botter stop this activity, and logging off would stop it. I know that you bumper-gankers find it fun, but it's not on the other side...
Lianne Dria
Doomheim
#33 - 2013-11-01 15:38:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Lianne Dria
It's funny cause' the only one's that would need this feature are the one's that abuse the system.

I am a new player, literally a week old now (and loving the game) I get 2 days a week that I can play and then I am writing assignments or programming for Uni through most of that time, so I high sec mine while alt-tabbed. (Trying to save up to get into haulage then it's bye bye mining, hello money printing.)

I have not been bumped yet myself, and while I think it would be extremely annoying, I don't think it is something worth making this module for, since, as mentioned, it is only those that abuse the system that need it. I check back regularly and can just line my self up again, the ones that complain are the ones that afk for the longest periods of time and leach.


While I don not condone bumping, I honestly do not see any point to this module when bumping is a completely legal move.

Just my two pennies.

Li

edit:
Also. I know you like hating on miners. But take a moment to think on it from an economics point of view. Everything in eve relies on a constant and rich enough supply of raw materials. It is the same in RL. We need iron to create steel to build cars. In Eve we need Tritanium and a myriad of other materials to build ships, weapons, ammo and a whole host of other items within the universe.

There is a large enough population of players with an extremely high volume of ships required on a day to day basis as pirate ships destroy freighters, wars causing losses on both sides and idiots doing idiot things. (Like forgetting to put their drones back after their job is done >.> <.< >.>)

If this demand did not exist, the market would flood with materials and then 90% of the miners would stop mining, problem solved. On the other end of the spectrum, if you got rid of all those miners you hate so much, the cost of even just a Tech 1 ship would quickly rise to billions from mere hundreds of K due to the scarcity of resources.

Could you imagine the cost of building a Titan if 1 piece of Tri cost 10,000k because no one mined it any more?
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#34 - 2013-11-01 15:50:47 UTC
no need for such a module - use a mack and orbit.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#35 - 2013-11-01 16:19:18 UTC
Lianne Dria wrote:

On the other end of the spectrum, if you got rid of all those miners you hate so much, the cost of even just a Tech 1 ship would quickly rise to billions from mere hundreds of K due to the scarcity of resources.

Could you imagine the cost of building a Titan if 1 piece of Tri cost 10,000k because no one mined it any more?


except there will always be miners ... but instead of it being a solo guy, it'll be a PVP group protecting their interests (likely in lowsec, so they can kill off anyone before it becomes a problem).

Hisec would likely die with CONCORD the way they are now.


Really, the problem with "miners" is not that they are miners .. .but that:

1. They* feel entitled to play the way they want, with no outside influences (such as bumping, ganking, etc).
2. They* feel entitled to not require the same tradeoffs as a combat ship (i.e. they should be 100% safe flying full yield, no tank fits)
3. They* feel that the only way to do things is via mechanics changes.


*"They" being the vocal ones. There are probably numerous other miners who get lumped in with these idiots by virtue of the simple fact of being a miner -- in much the same way miners will (generally) call all bumpers, gankers, initiators of hisec wardecs, etc. "griefers" when they're playing fully "safe" of the "griefing" line (as defined by CCP).

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

supernova ranger
The End of Eternity
#36 - 2013-11-01 16:31:04 UTC
Yaturi wrote:
After reading my fair share of miner tears on this board and many others I've come to a somewhat compassionate understanding to the plight of said miners.

First off let me clear the air and share my feelings on their profession.

I think belt bumping is kinda cheap and something I wouldn't do unless really angered at someone. Smile
Miner ganking on the other hand is something I find quite amusing. I have dabbled in its practices before and will also in the future.


So I think there should be a new mechanic introduced to the game.Big smile This is my variation of that mechanic:

Anchoring module exerts lco status (large collidable object)

has disengagement timer (cant warp off due to secondary timer, similar to how you cant target after decloak)
Can only be targeted on roids
Optimal of 5km
mid slot
moderately high cap, grid and cpu (will reduce overall yield and/or tanking ability)

Has cool almost bubblelish effect while activated. Maybe like a lightning static electricity luminosity to it.

Holes? Pick at them please.


Not to be rude but bothering to read this as continuous bumping falls under harassment, so it can be reported and dealt with.
Previous page12