These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Bumping Mechanics Discussion

First post
Author
Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2016-12-28 07:27:45 UTC
Any discussion of freighter ganking inevitably devolves into a discussion of bumping. Here are two ideas for bumping that do not entail a top down solution from CCP and instead allows player interaction in regards to bumping and clearing this primitive form of tackle.

So, here are the suggestions from frequent poster Black Pedro. When Black Pedro posted these ideas there was no interest in them from the anti-ganking community. When I reposted them again, again they were ignored.

Link

Quote:
Ok. Radical idea incoming to remove bumping:

Freighters (eventually maybe all capitals) do not generate a criminal flag in highsec if pointed/scrambled, while other aggressive modules still do. However, if you apply a point to a capital, you immediately go suspect. Freighters are then given a super MJD they can fit that warps them 500 km with a reasonably long (3-5 minutes?) spool-up time.

Pros: freighter escorts can clear off the tackler with guns and no CONCORD response
Cons: freighters are subject to harassment by non-committed attackers or tanky tacklers

Discuss.


The second idea,

Link

Quote:
I am not advocating for any of this for the record. Bumping in my eyes works perfectly fine in that it is almost 100% avoidable with a small amount of effort, and can lead to an escalation of fights - if it has any problems it is just that the mechanic is unintuitive to those that don't understand the game. But if you want to throw around ideas:

Idea two: Capital Interdictor deployable. A moderately expensive deployable that takes a minute to online (to allow scouts to see one is on a gate ahead). It can be scooped at this point, but if activated it is consumed. It can be activated on any capital ship having the effect of an infinite point near instantly and a timer starts (say 20 minutes). During this time the deployable is vulnerable and if it is destroyed, the tackled capital receives a short buff that boosts its agility and immunity to point so it can instawarp. Anyone who attacks the deployable goes suspect of course.

This allows aggressors to tackle a capital ship and the escorts a legal way to get out of it. It also could be used by the escorts to escape from a bumper by deploying it and then destroying it so there probably should be a short period of invulnerability (5 minutes? Although that could be the original deployment timer) so that aggressors can get some ships on the field to defend the deployable in that case.

A variant of this which could enable the other capitals in highsec is to have the deployable turn the capital ship suspect at the end of the 20 minutes. It would serve sort of an entosis mechanism forcing a fight where the capital ship's side is trying to destroy the deployable to free the ship, while the aggressors are trying to defend it so that CONCORD goes away and a real fight against the carrier or whatever can happen.

All of this, and the escalation idea it is centered around are hampered by the way flags work in highsec though. If you make a bumper or looter suspect now, the other side would just shoot it from behind the protection of CONCORD with no risk or escalation of the fight possible. Ideally you would want some system where if you join the game of cops and robbers you are now vulnerable to everyone on the other side rather than each side just sniping the other behind the safety of the NPCs.

Something drastic will have to change if CCP follows through with allowing capitals back into highsec though. My guess is any change to bumping is going to have to wait until then.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#2 - 2016-12-28 08:17:39 UTC
The current meta is working fine in my view, but it still can be tweaked. A relatively easy-to-implement solution would be to give corporations some of the priviliges taken away from them by Crimewatch. The idea is to keep suspect timers global, but if the suspect is a member of a player corp, you become a legal target for his entire corporation if you shoot him.

The rationale here is that looting haulers are defenseless by themselves. Gankers currently rely on mechanics like DST scooping because putting a looting hauler at risk equals gang **** in a busy solar system under the current mechanics. If they are able to keep a support fleet nearby to assist the looter if he gets attacked, they will be more eager to put their indies or even freighters under suspect timers. After that, something can be done with DST scooping - which is, after all, a controversial mechanic - without castrating the entire looting process.

Pros (the way I see them):
- increased functionality for highsec player corps (which is always good);
- more meaningful wardecs (corresponds with point 1);
- more escalation opportunities for the opposing side.

Side effects:
- With the suspect being able to bring in corp members for assistance, it will become easier to suspect bait. Yet, again, since the baiter must be in a player corp to get assistance from corp mates, he'll be vulnerable to wardecs. In case something is done with corp flipping later on, this effect will be further compensated.

Now, roast it, folks.

Agent of the New Order

Live by the Code - die by the Code.

The Voice of Highsec

Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
#3 - 2016-12-28 08:19:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
All the above ideas are worth hashing out. Let's hear what you have to say folks. They are certainly more interesting than the vapourware 3-minute cap proposed at Fanfest.
Iain Cariaba
#4 - 2016-12-28 10:07:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Iain Cariaba
How would any of this actually impact bumping?

Honestly, this looks more like something to get free points on freighters in highsec. Points are a much more reliable method than bumping to keep your freighter from warping off. The downside is that my single webbing escort keeps my freighter alt safely traversing highsec, and it would no longer be sufficient if being pointed didn't get the pointer Concorded.

Determining whether a freighter gets off a gate shouldn't be a matter of who has the lowest latency.

While I think highsec PvP needs a buff, this isn't the buff it needs. Retracting that idiotic watchlist change would help more than being able to point freighters.
Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2016-12-28 10:30:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Iain Cariaba wrote:
How would any of this actually impact bumping?

Honestly, this looks more like something to get free points on freighters in highsec. Points are a much more reliable method than bumping to keep your freighter from warping off. The downside is that my single webbing escort keeps my freighter alt safely traversing highsec, and it would no longer be sufficient if being pointed didn't get the pointer Concorded.

Determining whether a freighter gets off a gate shouldn't be a matter of who has the lowest latency.

While I think highsec PvP needs a buff, this isn't the buff it needs. Retracting that idiotic watchlist change would help more than being able to point freighters.


The idea is that bumping would not prevent warping, now a point would have to be used.

As with Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri and Black Pedro, I prefer the current meta of bumping, this is thread is here for two purposes:

1. Put forward alternatives,
2. Show that the AG really don't want to limit bumping except by a hard counter from CCP.

That latter means something along the lines of CCP simply declaring bumping an exploit until it can be patched out. The last two times these ideas were posted (well Black Pedro's) nobody on the AG side thought either of them as interesting.

BTW, I don't think undoing the watchlist change would do anything. With systems that exhibit emergence and spontaneous order you cannot often "go backwards".

Think of it this way, large alliances that engage in mass wardecs have been flying together for months, getting content and it is unlikely that simply reversing the watchlist change is going to have much effect on that. Sure such wardec alliances might take on targeted wardecs but why give up on mass wardecs? Why not have both and get as much content as possible.

That is the problem with systems that exhibit emergence and spontaneous order. Consider this a system of spontaneous order is of human action, but not of human design...that is CCP is far more impotent than many people posting here seem to think. Look, they have been trying to nerf HS PvP for quite sometime, but it just keeps morphing and changing. Maybe CCP are actually really, really smart and this was all planed...along with the max number of players logged in falling into the 20-22,000 range...but some how, I'm thinking no.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#6 - 2016-12-28 17:29:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Retracting that idiotic watchlist change would help more than being able to point freighters.

I will not debate the whole watch list change thing here as this is not the appropriate topic for it.
I will on the other hand note that undoing the watch list changes will have ZERO impact on bumping.

Bumping remains a very touchy and difficult topic to deal with, while there are some valid reasons to keep it there are as many valid reasons to remove it or change it significantly. One part of me wants it removed from the game entirely, the other says wait not so fast bumping is a tactic employed in my low sec life to keep a target from docking. One thought is to give the bumper a suspect timer, that would have virtually no effect on life in low, nul or worm holes but it would allow for your corp mates and the white knights in the game to actually come to your aide instead of flying off in hopes that they do no get caught. I know the gankers are not gong to like this because it actually puts their bumping characters at risk, but hey they are the ones telling us to bring friends to protect you and this idea makes that possible. The only problem we would need to work out with this is how to handle the unintentional bumps that occur when un-docking from a station.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Legion
#7 - 2016-12-28 17:49:55 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Retracting that idiotic watchlist change would help more than being able to point freighters.

I will not debate the whole watch list change thing here as this is not the appropriate topic for it.
I will on the other hand note that undoing the watch list changes will have ZERO impact on bumping.

Bumping remains a very touchy and difficult topic to deal with, while there are some valid reasons to keep it there are as many valid reasons to remove it or change it significantly. One part of me wants it removed from the game entirely, the other says wait not so fast bumping is a tactic employed in my low sec life to keep a target from docking. One thought is to give the bumper a suspect timer, that would have virtually no effect on life in low, nul or worm holes but it would allow for your corp mates and the white knights in the game to actually come to your aide instead of flying off in hopes that they do no get caught. I know the gankers are not gong to like this because it actually puts their bumping characters at risk, but hey they are the ones telling us to bring friends to protect you and this idea makes that possible. The only problem we would need to work out with this is how to handle the unintentional bumps that occur when un-docking from a station.


This is the problem with that idea. I and a few friends can park several freighters in front of jita 4-4 undock and cause chaos. Equally we can park 10km from a high traffic gate in line with auto piloting ships and cause an equal amount of chaos.
Iain Cariaba
#8 - 2016-12-28 18:12:34 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Retracting that idiotic watchlist change would help more than being able to point freighters.

I will not debate the whole watch list change thing here as this is not the appropriate topic for it.
I will on the other hand note that undoing the watch list changes will have ZERO impact on bumping.

Yeah, sorry about that. I meant it to be an example, but I get carried away cause I really hate losing it. I won't bring it up again. Smile
Cade Windstalker
#9 - 2016-12-28 18:55:41 UTC
Yeah, I don't really care for either this or a hard removal of bumping in any form. IMO the reason this didn't get much attention from "the AG crowd", or anyone else, is because it's pretty blatantly exploitable and just not a good idea.

The problem with bumping isn't that it exists, it's the lack of viable counter-play. Even if I have an alt in a bump-ship to try and bump the bumper that's unlikely to do anything meaningful right now or stop him long enough to allow a slow Freighter, Mining Barge, or Exhumer to do anything useful.

The general response at that point is "well gank him" which doesn't work in practice because to kill most bumping ships you need more ISK than his ship is worth and/or several additional players which makes this an impractical response, especially since he then gets free killrights to exercise. Overall that's a lose/lose/lose proposition for the bump-ee.

The "insert some kind of consequence for bumping" idea seems the best at first glance, but runs smack into, well, the Jita undock. Any procedural system for determining who should go suspect is going to run into issues or become exploitable, almost guaranteed.

CCP could always put in the system, make it as failsafe as possible, and then make abuse of the system an exploit that's punishable, but that's extremely likely to run into its own problems. There is at least a subset of the ganker population (and of Eve as a whole, to be fair) that is the sort to play "I'm not touching you!" in the back seat of the car after being told not to touch their sibling, and that sort of mentality will inevitably cause a headache for CCP when trying to enforce rules like this. I'm not sure that should stop them, but it is one more thing to consider.

Maybe some kind of soft-cap on bumping, like repeated bumps cause your ship to be able to compensate better so the slow-down after a bump becomes more abrupt until eventually the two ships basically just stop right next to each other even after a quite hard collision? As long as ships can still be bumped out of the way that would solve the Jita Undock problem, probably.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Legion
#10 - 2016-12-28 19:42:22 UTC
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.
Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2016-12-28 19:50:08 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Yeah, I don't really care for either this or a hard removal of bumping in any form. IMO the reason this didn't get much attention from "the AG crowd", or anyone else, is because it's pretty blatantly exploitable and just not a good idea.

The problem with bumping isn't that it exists, it's the lack of viable counter-play. Even if I have an alt in a bump-ship to try and bump the bumper that's unlikely to do anything meaningful right now or stop him long enough to allow a slow Freighter, Mining Barge, or Exhumer to do anything useful.

The general response at that point is "well gank him" which doesn't work in practice because to kill most bumping ships you need more ISK than his ship is worth and/or several additional players which makes this an impractical response, especially since he then gets free killrights to exercise. Overall that's a lose/lose/lose proposition for the bump-ee.

The "insert some kind of consequence for bumping" idea seems the best at first glance, but runs smack into, well, the Jita undock. Any procedural system for determining who should go suspect is going to run into issues or become exploitable, almost guaranteed.

CCP could always put in the system, make it as failsafe as possible, and then make abuse of the system an exploit that's punishable, but that's extremely likely to run into its own problems. There is at least a subset of the ganker population (and of Eve as a whole, to be fair) that is the sort to play "I'm not touching you!" in the back seat of the car after being told not to touch their sibling, and that sort of mentality will inevitably cause a headache for CCP when trying to enforce rules like this. I'm not sure that should stop them, but it is one more thing to consider.

Maybe some kind of soft-cap on bumping, like repeated bumps cause your ship to be able to compensate better so the slow-down after a bump becomes more abrupt until eventually the two ships basically just stop right next to each other even after a quite hard collision? As long as ships can still be bumped out of the way that would solve the Jita Undock problem, probably.


Well, you could use 7 or 8 catalysts to gank the bumping ship. Even 10 is just under 100 million ISK whereas the bumping ship would likely be 350 million ISK plus....

Here is a question: why isn't the freighter pilot, at the very least, offering to reimburse those who would gank the bumping ship?

I know, the first answer is probably going to be: Well, they could just take the money and not gank them. And while true, it kind of suggests an asymmetry at play here. The gankers are a much more tightly knit and cohesive group that the anti-ganking community....should this suggest greater "success"?

I think there are two problems when it comes to bumping.

1. One or both sides often want to hide behind NPCs. The notion of a criminal timer for the bumper is an example of this. The suspect timer is a bit better, but it still gives the person who decides to engage the bumper the initiative via CONCORD protection. That is, if I am happily bumping a foolish player in his overloaded freighter the person who decides to shoot me has the luxury of doing so whenever it suits him, but I can only engage him once he has started the engagement.

2. This apparent belief that things have to be symmetric in game. If I have high risk, anyone interacting with me must also have high risk. Why people hold this belief is beyond me. This is a sandbox game not chutes-n-ladders. The difference being if I can herd 10 cats (the pet, not the ship) and set up a gate camp it is going to be asymmetric game play until somebody else can herd 10+ cats together that are going to turn the tables on me and my guys. Maybe it is an innate desire for "fair play" but I would argue "fair play" has never been the overall intent of the game. Even in HS. Many of the complaints on the forums really amount to, "It's not fair, please fix it CCP!"

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2016-12-28 19:53:26 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.


Let me flip this concept to help get to the bottom of this:

Is the contention of the White Knight/AG community that once a freighter is getting bumped it is as good as dead--i.e. they have never ever saved a freighter in this situation? Ever?

Now, second question, if the answer is yes, why do you guys persist with this activity in game?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Cade Windstalker
#13 - 2016-12-28 20:37:55 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.


Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I'm well aware there are ways to avoid getting bumped in the first place, especially while traveling. The issue is that once you are bumped things like a web won't work by themselves, and besides that requires an alt in the first place (or a friend who doesn't mind coming to save your arse all the time), as does warping to a frigate and then getting webbed away.

Also, if the people bumping you are clever and have more than one person, they can see the Frigate and have a second bumper adjust your trajectory to bump you away from the direction of the frigate.

The biggest general issue here is all of your solutions here require either a friend or an alt, where as a moderately competent player can keep a Freighter bumped indefinitely on his own.

Also none of this helps with the other major place bumping occurs which is mining belts. None of your prospective solutions work here because your goal isn't just to escape the bumper, it's to be able to use the belt. Suicide ganking is a losing proposition because it takes more value in ship to do the gank than it does to do the bumping, and the bumper gets a free killright to play with every time you do that.

All of this leaves us with a mechanic that seriously disadvantages the defender rather than the aggressor in High Sec and doesn't have any particularly good counters beyond "have an alt" which isn't something to be relied on mechanically.

Teckos Pech wrote:
Well, you could use 7 or 8 catalysts to gank the bumping ship. Even 10 is just under 100 million ISK whereas the bumping ship would likely be 350 million ISK plus....

Here is a question: why isn't the freighter pilot, at the very least, offering to reimburse those who would gank the bumping ship?

I know, the first answer is probably going to be: Well, they could just take the money and not gank them. And while true, it kind of suggests an asymmetry at play here. The gankers are a much more tightly knit and cohesive group that the anti-ganking community....should this suggest greater "success"?

I think there are two problems when it comes to bumping.

1. One or both sides often want to hide behind NPCs. The notion of a criminal timer for the bumper is an example of this. The suspect timer is a bit better, but it still gives the person who decides to engage the bumper the initiative via CONCORD protection. That is, if I am happily bumping a foolish player in his overloaded freighter the person who decides to shoot me has the luxury of doing so whenever it suits him, but I can only engage him once he has started the engagement.

2. This apparent belief that things have to be symmetric in game. If I have high risk, anyone interacting with me must also have high risk. Why people hold this belief is beyond me. This is a sandbox game not chutes-n-ladders. The difference being if I can herd 10 cats (the pet, not the ship) and set up a gate camp it is going to be asymmetric game play until somebody else can herd 10+ cats together that are going to turn the tables on me and my guys. Maybe it is an innate desire for "fair play" but I would argue "fair play" has never been the overall intent of the game. Even in HS. Many of the complaints on the forums really amount to, "It's not fair, please fix it CCP!"


Ganking a bumping ship is actually rather difficult because they move fairly quickly and while they don't have a ton of HP the hulls themselves tend to be reasonably tanky by themselves.

On top of that if you do gank the player they end up with a good crop of killrights they'd be more than happy to exercise making it a win/win proposition for them.

I think the overall problem with bumping is that it's something that breaks the normal risk/reward and attack/defense dynamic in High Sec. Offense in High Sec is generally hard, expensive, risky, or all three at the same time. Bumping, on the other hand, is easy, fairly risk free, and fairly cheap.

It also doesn't have any good counterplay between the two primary actors. All of baltec1's suggestions for dealing with it involve *at least* one other player or alt assisting the player in question. There's nothing the pilot of the ship being bumped can do themselves to counter the tactic.

Overall this makes for something that's very frustrating to deal with because the pilot being 'aggressed' is left with no good response themselves.
Cade Windstalker
#14 - 2016-12-28 20:39:40 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.


Let me flip this concept to help get to the bottom of this:

Is the contention of the White Knight/AG community that once a freighter is getting bumped it is as good as dead--i.e. they have never ever saved a freighter in this situation? Ever?

Now, second question, if the answer is yes, why do you guys persist with this activity in game?


I'd also like to clarify here, I'm not "AG" or whatever. I'm pro-good game mechanics, and I don't think bumping currently is one.

It's also not really accurate IMO to say that there really is much of an "AG" community. There are people who post on the forums and are against ganking, but generally speaking there's no more a cohesive group of "anti-gank" players than you could say that all the various ganking groups are a cohesive whole.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Legion
#15 - 2016-12-28 20:53:30 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.


Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I'm well aware there are ways to avoid getting bumped in the first place, especially while traveling. The issue is that once you are bumped things like a web won't work by themselves, and besides that requires an alt in the first place (or a friend who doesn't mind coming to save your arse all the time), as does warping to a frigate and then getting webbed away.

Also, if the people bumping you are clever and have more than one person, they can see the Frigate and have a second bumper adjust your trajectory to bump you away from the direction of the frigate.

The biggest general issue here is all of your solutions here require either a friend or an alt, where as a moderately competent player can keep a Freighter bumped indefinitely on his own.

Also none of this helps with the other major place bumping occurs which is mining belts. None of your prospective solutions work here because your goal isn't just to escape the bumper, it's to be able to use the belt. Suicide ganking is a losing proposition because it takes more value in ship to do the gank than it does to do the bumping, and the bumper gets a free killright to play with every time you do that.

All of this leaves us with a mechanic that seriously disadvantages the defender rather than the aggressor in High Sec and doesn't have any particularly good counters beyond "have an alt" which isn't something to be relied on mechanically.


Freighters were added into eve as a corp level asset to solve the problem of supplying nullsec. They were designed to require a convoy which is why they have such limited fitting options. Much like other capital ships they need support to get the best results.

As far as mining bumping goes, you can do several things to stop bumping from spider webbing a fleet to fitting prop mods that allow you to simply get out of the way.
Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2016-12-28 20:58:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Cade Windstalker wrote:


Ganking a bumping ship is actually rather difficult because they move fairly quickly and while they don't have a ton of HP the hulls themselves tend to be reasonably tanky by themselves.

On top of that if you do gank the player they end up with a good crop of killrights they'd be more than happy to exercise making it a win/win proposition for them.

I think the overall problem with bumping is that it's something that breaks the normal risk/reward and attack/defense dynamic in High Sec. Offense in High Sec is generally hard, expensive, risky, or all three at the same time. Bumping, on the other hand, is easy, fairly risk free, and fairly cheap.

It also doesn't have any good counterplay between the two primary actors. All of baltec1's suggestions for dealing with it involve *at least* one other player or alt assisting the player in question. There's nothing the pilot of the ship being bumped can do themselves to counter the tactic.

Overall this makes for something that's very frustrating to deal with because the pilot being 'aggressed' is left with no good response themselves.


Well here is the thing, I bet if 10 catalysts suddenly land on the freighter and they are not purple to the bumping ship and he doesn't know who the Hell they are my guess he'd strongly consider warping off, especially when they start closing on him....in which case, congratulations; mission accomplished--you saved the freighter...and still have your catalysts. If not and he stays, 10 catalysts with target painters would definitely present a problem. Their DPS is probably going to be in the range of 5,000 plus (combined--i.e. each cat doing at least 500 DPS on average). And I'm sure in 19 or so seconds there would be a wreck, an expensive wreck, where the bumper was.

Yes, he'd get kill rights, but interestingly that is almost always dismissed by those arguing against ganking...and the idea here is that if you are imposing 3x or more in losses on your opponent relative to your losses...that is eventually going to be a problem. Do this enough and it will raise the bar in terms of cargo value at risk.

As for risk, I don't see the problem here. Sure there is asymmetry in the risk, but that is only because one player was a serial screw-up when comes to evaluating his own risk vs. reward. He decided to take on substantial risk for very little to no reward.

And same thing with the counter-play. Yes, the freighter pilot has far fewer options when he is getting bumped. The suggested solution is not to provide counter play to somebody who screwed up multiple times maybe even many, many times. The solution is to not make yourself so vulnerable.

Lets consider another aspect of the game: corp thefts. There isn't much in the way of counter play there once the thief decides to act. He is going to pick his time when there is minimal chance of discovery and strike. The risk v. reward is again highly skewed. Why isn't anyone asking for a solution to this issue? Everyone seems fine with: Well, do what you can ex ante to prevent the theft. Same thing withe freighter bumping....do what you can to prevent it.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2016-12-28 21:02:38 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Ok I'll put a pin in this no counters myth.

First counter is to web the freighter into warp. All you need is a friend in any ship with a few webs fitted but something with a Web range bonus is best. Your freighter now warps so fast that not only is it impossible to bump but also goes into warp backwards.

Second is if you get bumped. Fly a fast frigate out in the direction the freighter is being bumped and at 150 km warp the freighter to the frigate. You can the Web it into warp.

Third is to simply bump the bumpers. This takes some degree of manual piloting but can be done with a few cheap cruisers.

Fourth option is to gank the bumping ship. These bumping ships don't tend to have any tank so are fairly easy to kill.

Fish is to suicide web the bumper. Done right the freighter will get away.


Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I'm well aware there are ways to avoid getting bumped in the first place, especially while traveling. The issue is that once you are bumped things like a web won't work by themselves, and besides that requires an alt in the first place (or a friend who doesn't mind coming to save your arse all the time), as does warping to a frigate and then getting webbed away.

Also, if the people bumping you are clever and have more than one person, they can see the Frigate and have a second bumper adjust your trajectory to bump you away from the direction of the frigate.

The biggest general issue here is all of your solutions here require either a friend or an alt, where as a moderately competent player can keep a Freighter bumped indefinitely on his own.

Also none of this helps with the other major place bumping occurs which is mining belts. None of your prospective solutions work here because your goal isn't just to escape the bumper, it's to be able to use the belt. Suicide ganking is a losing proposition because it takes more value in ship to do the gank than it does to do the bumping, and the bumper gets a free killright to play with every time you do that.

All of this leaves us with a mechanic that seriously disadvantages the defender rather than the aggressor in High Sec and doesn't have any particularly good counters beyond "have an alt" which isn't something to be relied on mechanically.


Freighters were added into eve as a corp level asset to solve the problem of supplying nullsec. They were designed to require a convoy which is why they have such limited fitting options. Much like other capital ships they need support to get the best results.

As far as mining bumping goes, you can do several things to stop bumping from spider webbing a fleet to fitting prop mods that allow you to simply get out of the way.


Or even try orbiting the asteroid, hitting a moving target is harder than hitting one sitting still.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2016-12-28 21:05:44 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


It's also not really accurate IMO to say that there really is much of an "AG" community. There are people who post on the forums and are against ganking, but generally speaking there's no more a cohesive group of "anti-gank" players than you could say that all the various ganking groups are a cohesive whole.


That cohesive part might be part of the problem as I already noted. One side is much more cohesive than the other....hence the imbalance. But that imbalance is not something CCP should be trying to fix at all. That is what it means to have a sandbox game. The side that is more cohesive will have an advantage over the side that is not. Punishing players for building a cohesive "community" within the game is just bad game management and will drive players away.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Cade Windstalker
#19 - 2016-12-28 21:46:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Freighters were added into eve as a corp level asset to solve the problem of supplying nullsec. They were designed to require a convoy which is why they have such limited fitting options. Much like other capital ships they need support to get the best results.

As far as mining bumping goes, you can do several things to stop bumping from spider webbing a fleet to fitting prop mods that allow you to simply get out of the way.


Freighters have been in the game 9 years, any original intent has long since been overwritten by successive patches by CCP and years of use by players. What we and CCP have to deal with is the reality of the ships, not their original golden ideal use-case, which is the case for anything in this game.

This isn't even really a case of "best results" either. A normal gank requires dozens of people (more or less) to pull off on a Freighter, especially a tanked one. Just bumping him requires all of one, which brings us back to the imbalance I was talking about.

As far as mining goes that works, moderately well, for barges and Exhumers, but not really at all for an Orca or similar ship. Also it's not *that* hard to hit a moving target while bumping, I've done my fair share of it just for giggles (or good natured trolling) with corp mates or friends and never found it particularly hard to hit a moving target even with my limited amount of practice. Someone who does it on a more regular basis would probably have even less trouble than myself and be more consistent.

Teckos Pech wrote:
That cohesive part might be part of the problem as I already noted. One side is much more cohesive than the other....hence the imbalance. But that imbalance is not something CCP should be trying to fix at all. That is what it means to have a sandbox game. The side that is more cohesive will have an advantage over the side that is not. Punishing players for building a cohesive "community" within the game is just bad game management and will drive players away.


This isn't really a problem, IMO, it's just how the incentives play out in the game. Ganking has a financial and entertainment incentive, whereas sitting around on the off chance you might stop a gank is pretty boring and offers no significant financial reward.

This isn't an issue for ganking in general, and if bumping were somehow magically removed as a thing it wouldn't kill ganking either, just make it a little harder and more expensive due to gate guns.

The issue here is that Bumping is an effectively aggressive mechanic with no punishment or effective counter-play in an area where all comparable mechanics have some kind of punishment and/or counterplay. It's why the idea of making bumpers go suspect comes up in these discussions so often, because bumping is similar to can theft in a lot of ways in that it's an aggressive action which does fairly limited harm in and of itself and has a similarly harmless-by-itself deterrent.

If bumping Machs in Uedama could go flashy I'd fit a scram to anything I travel in with guns and happily check grid for a minute every time I'm through there on the off chance I can pop one.
Cade Windstalker
#20 - 2016-12-28 21:58:57 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Well here is the thing, I bet if 10 catalysts suddenly land on the freighter and they are not purple to the bumping ship and he doesn't know who the Hell they are my guess he'd strongly consider warping off, especially when they start closing on him....in which case, congratulations; mission accomplished--you saved the freighter...and still have your catalysts. If not and he stays, 10 catalysts with target painters would definitely present a problem. Their DPS is probably going to be in the range of 5,000 plus (combined--i.e. each cat doing at least 500 DPS on average). And I'm sure in 19 or so seconds there would be a wreck, an expensive wreck, where the bumper was.

Yes, he'd get kill rights, but interestingly that is almost always dismissed by those arguing against ganking...and the idea here is that if you are imposing 3x or more in losses on your opponent relative to your losses...that is eventually going to be a problem. Do this enough and it will raise the bar in terms of cargo value at risk.

As for risk, I don't see the problem here. Sure there is asymmetry in the risk, but that is only because one player was a serial screw-up when comes to evaluating his own risk vs. reward. He decided to take on substantial risk for very little to no reward.


Killrights are dismissed as ineffective because for most of the players likely to accumulate them they are. Someone who flies a freighter around may not even have PvP skills, and most of those with any investment in shutting down gankers have other things they tend to prefer to do with their time than chasing people around high sec.

On top of that players can quite easily get dedicated ganker characters that will never fly an expensive ship and are unlikely to spend much time in space. The average well rounded High Sec character on the other hand likely at least missions or hauls, making them a far more lucrative target if you can get a Killright on them.

On top of that, sort of getting back to the organization aspect of things, the gankers will likely have a corp of likeminded individuals they can assign the killrights to, making it far more likely that they'll be acted on before they expire.

I'm not saying any of this needs fixing, but it does mean that the reality of ganking a bumper is that it's still a win for the bumper.

Also it's extremely unlikely for anyone looking to stop a gank to be able to bring together enough pilots to even gank him in the first place, at least in any kind of cost effective manner, and even more unlikely that they'll be able to or interested in keeping up the practice, because while you might be able to skew the value of the ship in favor of the people ganking the bumper those players would likely rather be doing other things with their time.

For more or less the same reason you'll rarely find forum trolls trolling each other. There's far more entertainment and easier targets to be had going after others, so while players may get pissed and go after gankers for short periods the gankers have made a lifestyle out of this and will return as soon as the coast is clear and the "AGs" get bored.

Teckos Pech wrote:
And same thing with the counter-play. Yes, the freighter pilot has far fewer options when he is getting bumped. The suggested solution is not to provide counter play to somebody who screwed up multiple times maybe even many, many times. The solution is to not make yourself so vulnerable.

Lets consider another aspect of the game: corp thefts. There isn't much in the way of counter play there once the thief decides to act. He is going to pick his time when there is minimal chance of discovery and strike. The risk v. reward is again highly skewed. Why isn't anyone asking for a solution to this issue? Everyone seems fine with: Well, do what you can ex ante to prevent the theft. Same thing withe freighter bumping....do what you can to prevent it.


I'm curious where you think the screw-up occurred here, because just looking at bumping (independent of the ganks it often leads to) the only screw-up I can find is "flying a Freighter". Once you're in a Freighter there's nothing you can do to prevent being bumped without at least one alt, and if by bad luck or something else you are bumped there's nothing you can do against any sort of reasonably competent player.

Corp thefts are something completely different and don't even bear comparison here. For a start, they're completely independent of High Sec space or any of its punishment or reward mechanics where as bumping is an almost entirely High Sec activity. It's also pure PvP and there are countermeasures that can be taken against it, such as proper use of roles, vetting players, and compartmentalizing assets.

None of this may stop a truly determined corp thief, but in general it's pretty effective and the level of work required to be a successful thief far outweighs the amount of effort required to stop the vast majority of lazy or bad corp thieves. Trust me, I spent enough time in Eve Uni to have an idea of how many people are just really *really* bad at being a corp thief.

If you can come up with some kind of similar counter-play to Freighter bumping then by all means, that would be fantastic. More mechanics in Eve need the sort of complicated interactions corp theft requires, both on a mechanical and meta-game level.
123Next pageLast page