These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Miner Bumping: Discussion & Questions Thread

First post First post
Author
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2012-11-29 17:56:58 UTC
The one thing I hope the CCP GM's who consider this issue do, is check the most vocal complainers about miner-bumping in this thread, and who send in petitions ingame, and see how many of them either don't have Ice Harvesting trained, or trained it on their 5 year old account only a few months ago specifically to come mine in the New Order occupied systems. The hilarity of people who have never mined before, and who now only mine because of the New Order, claiming that in their opinion the New Order is harmful to mining in general, is beyond description. And yet, this is precisely the case. The most vocal anti-miner bumpers fit this description perfectly. If the senior GMs pay attention to people's actions, and not to their words, they will perceive an entirely different scenario, one in which minerbumping is seen to be beneficial emergent gameplay.
Anuillae Fourneaux
Calydon Inc.
#42 - 2012-11-29 18:01:09 UTC
As a miner and vehement anti-bumper, I should like to say that I do not think that CCP should change either the mechanics or the rules of the game to prevent bumping or to serve those miners who are too apathetic to do something for themselves. While I do believe that miner bumping is an abhorrent display of the even worse personalities of the people behind the characters, there are counters and we should be capable of fighting back on our own, without resorting to whining to CCP as miners so often have.

[center]How can there be resistance without leadership?


www.Proveldtariat.Wordpress.com[/center]

Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-11-29 18:02:53 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan


[i wrote:

Edit: Rule 24 Off topic quoting was deleted - ISD Tyrozan[/i]

As the thread titles explicitly states, this thread is about miner bumping. I'm not sure why you're airing your grievances in here, but CCP Falcon did ask us to stay on topic. Do you think that you could, please?

Edit: If you do want a place to discuss freighter bumping, try here.




Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan
Anuillae Fourneaux
Calydon Inc.
#44 - 2012-11-29 18:05:18 UTC
Ahvram wrote:
Also as he stated there can be no other threads started on bumping so I posted here.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=176555&find=unread

The thread is already there, seriously, this isn't the right place for your problems.

[center]How can there be resistance without leadership?


www.Proveldtariat.Wordpress.com[/center]

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#45 - 2012-11-29 18:12:34 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Bumping is fine, both freighter and miner, both involve a group of players claiming a system or 3 for themselves, then choosing to try and control certain activities in those systems.

I'll give some miners props though, sometimes they'll come back and have a go, they normally die hilariously, as proved by the tormenter that tried to take on a logistics orca, that was fitted for bait, but props to the guys that do.

There is emergent gameplay from both the miners and the bumpers, the bumpers is obvious, the miner not so much, there are mining corps that support what the bumpers are doing, they either purchase corp permits or require that their mining members have a licence, they've adapted, they actually talk in local, a rare sight indeed in an icebelt, licence holders receive orca support if it can be provided, most union like. The side benefit is removal of the competition.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Mathalina
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-11-29 18:39:40 UTC
Why is this in the forum where all the griefers and bumpers hang out and not somewhere that miners and pve people can actually chime in?
Llort
A Space Odyssey
#47 - 2012-11-29 18:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
EVE appeals to me (and many others) because of its freedom. CCP provides the game and basically allows you to determine your own priorities and playstyle. You get a ship and endless amounts of space, after which you have to find your way of enjoying it. Obviously a few limitations are there, like Concord and a set of aggro rules made up over almost a decade. The reasons for these limitations are simple; without any there could not be a game, with too many it could as well be a single player game.

The whole issue of minerbumping is essentially about this. Is the game unplayable with minerbumpers? As an agent and former miner I can safely say you can still mine. The universe is endless and the New Order is only in one field. Even if the masses would join our movement, the abundance of icefields make full controll by bumpers unlikely. Other then that there are ways to make bumping a real challenge. So skill also helps, bumpers just contribute to the game that way, making mining a skilled job rather then an afk activity.

With rules against bumping, implemented because too many tears were spilled and not because it is impossible to mine, EVE would lose both its multiplayer nature and its unique danger-rich environment. All that because people were too lazy to improve their fitting, to change tactics or to simply move out.

Minerbumping adds something else to this game, it wakes up a comatose part of the game where botting, mutliboxing and afkness would make it the ugly element of EVE. To top that James 315 managed to build a complete roleplaying storyline to make the bumping a natural element of the game. For those that complain about harassment, I do wonder what the whole idea of ships with guns and shields made you think think this game is about. It is where people shoot stuff, harassment like asking for a game currency or bumping is the most innocent part of that. Imagine petitions from people saying that shooting them amounts to attempted theft of even worse an attempt at assault. Do not compare in-game actions to real life, that does not make sense.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2012-11-29 19:03:27 UTC
Bumping should be permitted as its one of the few ways to meaningfully affect someone in highsec. Wardecs have never been meaningful because they are too easily avoided and suicide ganking is the eternal whipping boy. That leaves awoxing and bumping as the remaining meaningful ways to affect someone in highsec. Leave bumping untouched until new ways of affecting people in highsec have been introduced.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Dervinus
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#49 - 2012-11-29 19:07:02 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Miner bumping is a beautiful example of emergent gameplay


Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan

o7 toonies

Winchester Steele
#50 - 2012-11-29 19:07:25 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Quote:
So miners should stop mining, train to pvp, and fight you. They should just abandon what they wanna do and come after you, right? Why the hell should they have to bend to you?



Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


As far as bumping bending the mechanics, I have to say that I wholly reject that argument. Bumping has been a part of this game since time immemorial. There are plenty of counters to it, not the least of which is being creative and using your brain. Organize, gank the bumpers (protip: this is really easy if you actually bothered to understand the game you play), wardec the bumpers (i will never be an NPC corpie), pay mercs to camp the bumpers; in short come PLAY the game as it was intended to be played. Do anything besides afk mine and whine about your entitlement to risk free income on the forums.

Quote:
Seriously? You think they're bringing this up because a "small" number of people are ticked that you won't leave them alone? Wow you're disillusioned. Here's an idea, leave the miners alone to get on with the serious business of interwebs spaceshipping and go back to low. All you people want is nerf high sec nerf high sec blablabla. Seriously...



Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


Quote:
They are entitled to solo play, and don't even get started with that "foul language" crap you hypocrits, especially when you use it yourself and you have a post saying "oh the rules don't apply to agents because they're better than you, you're a second class citizen." Get out.



Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan

...

Dahc Harbinger
Quantum Star Conglomerate
Vukkei Combine
#51 - 2012-11-29 19:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
I'm a few weeks into the game, but here's my nickel for what it's worth.


Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


But, not sure I'm for bumping as it stands now. Seems like there's no real action you can take to truly defeat the bumpers - whether you're AFK or not. I mean, other than paying the 10M ISK. Blink

I was thinking the new mining frigate might be a possible solution in Retribution as far as avoiding "the bump", whipping around an asteroid at speed and dumping to a can. At least if the bumpers try to can flip you can shoot them if you're in a group and you're organized / prepared. But, what then stops the bumpers from bumping your hauler when it comes for the can(s)? And, no doubt the yield, even from a dedicated ORE mining frigate, won't match the lowliest barge.

I don't believe in an AFK miner fix. You're playing a game, be in the game. With that said, maybe, as someone earlier alluded to, mining itself is what needs fixing. Because, with all due respect to miners - it's boring as all heck.


Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


Anyway, think I'm staring to ramble; time to step off for a bit.

Cheers,
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2012-11-29 19:12:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Edit: Rule 7 - Trolling is prohibited. - ISD Tyrozan
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-11-29 19:12:59 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan

Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan

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.

Winchester Steele
#54 - 2012-11-29 19:21:45 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Edit: Trolling quote removed - ISD Tyrozan


Edit: Rule trolling is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan

...

87102-6
Doomheim
#55 - 2012-11-29 19:22:50 UTC
For folks not quite familiar with the situation that's been going on and why I deem it harassment (as does this fellow apparently), let me clue you in to what's happening in Abudban (and what has happened in Tolle). This also contains bulletpoints refuting some of the "methods miners can use to retaliate". Acronyms used here:

NO = New Order
NOA = New Order "Agents"

- NOA appear in Local chat and demand 10M ISK in English only, else be bumped "or worse".

- Recipient must respond pubicly in Local chat in some manner.

- NOA insists they only do this to "AFK players mining" or "bot-like players mining", but there are many reports of this happening to people who are active in-game (keep reading for how this could happen).

- In recent days (since roughly November 25th) NOA have begun suicide ganking for lack of payment. Suicide ganking IS permitted per CCP as a tactic, and so I am not complaining about that -- instead, I am stating that the "bumping" tactic may have been a catalyst for something more major.

- Payment of ISK does not guarantee player is no longer harassed.

- Amount of time the recipient has to respond to NOA varies; sometimes it maybe up to 1.5 hours, other times it has been as short as 13 seconds.

- Short durations of time do not give non-English-speaking players proper amount of time to respond (in any language), which could be construed as harassment. This also makes the assumption they can read/understand English to begin with. EVE is officially supported in English, Russian, German, and Japanese.

- Failure to respond results in bumping "or worse".

- Failure to respond could be one of many non-technical reasons, such as:

** Bio (restroom/bathroom) breaks (more on that in a moment)
** Player not watching Local chat (minimised window, etc. -- all permitted)
** Health issues (examples include IBS, IBD, Chron's disease, diabetes, etc.)
** Real life emergency situations (too many to list here)
** Recipient does not understand/cannot read English

- CCP does not have any rules against players with the above disabilities not being permitted to play EVE. Meaning: players cannot be *expected* to be at their computers at all times.

- Regarding bio breaks: NO has stated clearly that EVE players are not allowed to use their restroom facilities without NOA consent first:

http://www.minerbumping.com/2012/10/new-order-bathroom-protocol.html

This should absolutely be deemed a form of harassment. I can expand on this (it's quite personal) if need be -- just ask.

- Recipient aggravation is accomplished in a different way than classic or historic griefing or "general gamer aggression". Tactics seen so far include but are not limited to:

** Multiple NOA (in some cases, 10+) bombarding player in Local chat with demands or insults/insinuations (if pressured)
** One or more NOA bumping the player while another simultaneously demands player respond in local else risk further damage (i.e. suicide ganking)

- NOA as a majority (95% of the time) are all in separate corporations with no alliances. This causes the following complications when it comes to miners being able to retaliate:

** Recipient cannot feasibly declare wardec on every corporation when being harassed by multiple NOA simultaneously -- success rate here is roughly 0.01% by my guess (just pulling numbers out of my butt)
** Wardec situation can be worked around by disbanding corporation (and this has been done by James 315 himself multiple times and admitted on his blog at that). Another method is described by an uninvolved corporation (tag: R-RIN). Quoting: "... and if wardec'd, it takes 24 hours for the wardec to go into effect, and it takes 24 hours to let the dummy account take over the corp as it's sole member.. Yeah, do the math.. if someone wants to waste their money wardecing us, it's their decision to do so.. Like I said, we have no interest in that type Gameplay and we have a plan to ensure that we can continue to play regardless ..."
** Recipient cannot feasibly declare bounties on every individual involved -- too expensive, particularly when multiple NOA involved
** Bounty declaration cannot be used as retaliation due to following known "defect" of bounties:
- Recipient declares bounty on NOA
- Owner of NOA logs in via separate client with alt character
- Alt kills NOA and collects bounty ISK. This technique has also been used by James 315 to subvert bounty.

- With regards to language barrier, there is already evidence of this causing problems. I've cut this out of my explanation because it's quite long but can provide it in another post.

- NO has stated clearly that players "in their systems" are not permitted to file petitions with CCP else risk effects. The exact quote is here: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html

"To minimize the workload of our GMs, miners shall not file petitions against the Supreme Protector or his Agents. Failure to abide by this rule is an automatic Red Pen violation (see below)."

- Filing petitions has historically resulted in GMs closing the petitions. This has been stated by multiple users who have complained. I do not know if the petitions stated "I'm being mining bumped" and thus since "bumping is permitted" they were closed, or what.

When players are harassing others as a result of things like bio breaks and language barriers, and demanding players cannot file petitions... well, do the math. It doesn't take a genius to see that this is harassment in all forms, just covered up in a sly manner.
MTB BR
Mining Cartel high
#56 - 2012-11-29 19:28:28 UTC  |  Edited by: MTB BR
I dont understand why my topic was edited i don't realy know where I disrespect the Rule 24. All things that was deleted was about the bumping an harassment in Abudbam. but is ok.



Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


I have some ideas to make this situation more fair to mines
Ship modifications: All T2 mining barges and Orca be able to fit 1 heavy missile bay our Large Turret weapon. That will help keep this vessels safe till concord gets in action.
Make the ensure of a ship based in the region price that it was insure . That will help t2 ships to be replaced faster.
About bump in Hi sec: transform it in a semi illegal practice. For example : during the day 24h 1st bump the bumper gests a warning. Second bump e turns in to a outlaw and 3 bump concord takes action against him. The bumped player has the right to forgive the bumper so in case of accidental bump the bumper don’t take penalty. In fleet it do not get penalty to. Cause its normal to be bumped in fleet warping.


Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan
Dervinus
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#57 - 2012-11-29 19:30:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
87102-6 wrote:
:words:



Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan
.

o7 toonies

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2012-11-29 19:33:21 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Quote:
The fact is this. Eve is a game. It is meant to be enjoyed. Eve is a sandbox. People can play how they want. But when does one person exercising that freedom exercise it to a point that's just irresponsible and malicious and just really ruining someone's fun all day, every day? With great power comes great responsibility etc. Raining on someone's parade has always been an aspect of Eve, but there was always a way to fight back.

Got ganked? Tank and prevent it.
Mission ninjas? Warp out and let them get aggro or shoot wrecks.
Low sec pirates hunting you? D-scan and warp around to safe points.
Ransomed? Take revenge by slipping an alt in their corp and awoxing or jacking their wallet.



You just answered your own question and proved why bumping should NOT be changed for miners.

You aren't being forced to stay in system. Leave if you like. The door is open. You aren't being killed, or attacked in any way that jeopardizes you in any form. You even aren't forced to spend any isk whatsoever.

Edit: Rule 7 - Trolling is not permitted - ISD Tyrozan

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.

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-11-29 19:33:22 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
In addition to my previous post if you remove ways of affecting highsec players without adding others you make the game itself less interesting. Look at the forum threads and the two opposing websites, something as simple as bumping has spawned as examples of this. Without this simple mechanic, bumping, none of that would have happened and highsec would be that much more dull. Ask yourself this CCP, "do I really want to remove a key tool in creating content for my game just to appease a minority of loud whiners?"

Returned by CCP Eterne

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Kayla Miromme
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2012-11-29 19:33:29 UTC
This thread seems to be changing from a discussion on bumping to a discussion on The New Order of HIghsec, which I doubt is what was intended.

I am a miner. When it comes to the actual mechanic of bumping, I see no reason to change it. The system works fine as it is, and I disagree with anyone who whines or complains about needing an anchor mod or some other gameplay change.