These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP allow miners to defend against bumpers ?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#101 - 2012-10-24 18:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Vanyr Andrard
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Well then web away! Aggressing a corpmate isn't a CONCORD offence.


(You knew that, right?)

How do i simultaneously join the corp of every bumper in existence, assuming they agree to it?

(you knew that was impossible already, right?)

((did you miss the specification of 'hostile webifying', or the parellelism between bumping and webifying implying webifying noncorpmates?))

You do realize that you web the mining ships, so they don't move as much, right? And yes, with an in-corp (player) web.



There were multiple people responding so it got a bit mixed up...yes, the situation you initiated this discussion about works that way, but I then expanded it into an entire new discussion in which that isn't relevant. Sorry for the confusion.
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#102 - 2012-10-24 18:59:43 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Except that your shareholders were coerced by your extortion.

Sounds like you need to get more familiar with my business. Smile

MinerBumping.com
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-10-24 19:00:20 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Falcon
James 315 wrote:
Sounds like you need to get more familiar with my business. Smile


No, your "business" simply needs to be purged Smile
Dessau
The Scope
#104 - 2012-10-24 19:00:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dessau
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
It's ok, soon you're be pushed out with the rest of the undesirables :)

Well, you've got one thing over Hitler: at least you give us a cheerful smile when you proselytize your Final Solution.

Awesome filter, CCP. Pirate
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#105 - 2012-10-24 19:02:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tali Ambraelle wrote:

In his little world sure, he can do that all he wants. Not at the cost of the miners and their right to gain what they paid money for.


That's the thing about Eve, you are free to create your own world.

Quote:

It is not game play, it is him gaming the system and exploiting something as an undesirable belligerent.


Nope he is actively playing the game & the metagame to, by definition that is gameplay, in this case its Emergent Gameplay which is a major selling point of Eve, CCP provide the tools, the players decide how to use them.

Quote:

Except miners never bothered him, let alone knew who he was before he took it upon himself to interrupt paying customers trying to relax. So what mining is boring? They need minerals to feed their industrial machine to provide items to people and to feed their other gameplay. Would you really tell me that they have to sit there and stare at rocks?


I mine on an alt, I do actually sit there and watch the screen, I may have a small VLC window pinned on top in the corner or be using a pinned chrome window to watch youtube or browse the web but I'm always aware of my surroundings in Eve

Quote:
If so, you too are a belligerent undesirable for not allowing them the freedom of choice they deserve, as opposed to hiding behind the same excuse of "freedom" to justify his belligerent behavior.


You have exactly the same freedoms ingame as everyone else to affect others, it is a major selling point of Eve that each and every player has the potential to affect every other player either positively or negatively. I choose to support James315 because for every lost cycle due to bumping, my mining alts productivity/ISK ratio increases.

Quote:
It's ok, soon you're to be pushed out with the rest of the undesirables :)


Nope, I will not be pushed out of hisec by any changes to the game apart from CCP giving into the demands for a completely safe & zero risk hisec.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Nanatoa
#106 - 2012-10-24 19:03:09 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Except that your shareholders were coerced by your extortion.


That is a blatant lie. As one of the largest shareholders, I can guarantee you that I parted with my 1.337 billion isk out of my own free will, because I appreciate what James 315 does and I want to endorse and support him and the New Order.

"Stay the course, we have done this many times before." - (CCP) Hilmar, June 2011
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2012-10-24 19:03:49 UTC
Nanatoa wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Except that your shareholders were coerced by your extortion.


That is a blatant lie. As one of the largest shareholders, I can guarantee you that I parted with my 1.337 billion isk out of my own free will, because I appreciate what James 315 does and I want to endorse and support him and the New Order.


And that is why you're listed on his website as a top donor? Right Smile
BeanBagKing
The Order of Atlas
#108 - 2012-10-24 19:04:35 UTC
Acutally, I think I'll take the time to respond to this.
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
1. In what way am I an "undesirable"?
You interfere with game play of other individuals and ruin the product they paid for.

They may be interfering with 'your' gameplay, but the rest of this is wrong. The product they (you) pay for is a sandbox. This gives people the right and ability to do whatever they want. You have no more a right to call for his ban as he does for yours. You don't pay to be protected from every little thing, this is Eve. If you don't like this product, feel free to stop paying for it.

Let me use an example. If I pay for a shared apache webhost and insist that they install windows server for me because I payed for a webhost, they will tell me no, I paid for their specific service by their terms of service, if I want a windows server I can go elsewhere. They won't make everyone sharing that server change because of me. I can then choose to adapt to this, or take my money somewhere else. Saying "I'm paying for this" doesn't give me the automatic right to demand that things be fixed so that I am completely happy.

You are paying for the right to play Eve on their terms and conditions. If you don't like these terms and conditions sure, you can complain, but saying that you have "rights" and are "entitled" to things is completely wrong. Let me know how you deal with real life conditions when you don't get your way.

Tali Ambraelle wrote:
2. Why is your opinion about my desirability more important than others'?
Because many, many others find you as a belligerent undesirable. I merely echo it.

Many others are sticking up for him (btw, I'm a nullsec player, I don't have a vested interest in either side). Some people finding his actions undesirable does not make your opinion about his behavior more important that others. Despite what they told you in school, you are not a special snowflake, and the universe doesn't revolve around you.

Tali Ambraelle wrote:
3. Why should I get a ban if I do not violate the EULA?
Miners consider it an exploit as you interfere with what they do at no consequence to you, at all.

And I consider the moon to be made of cheese. This doesn't make it true. You can consider it an exploit all you want but until CCP changes the EULA to reflect this, his actions are perfectly within the bounds of gameplay (the product, referenced earlier).

Tali Ambraelle wrote:
4. How am I interrupting others' game play by improving it?
You are not improving mining, you are preventing their mining gameplay

He is preventing one facet of gameplay and creating another. He has found an income source, same as you. There are pleanty of examples in Eve where one persons gameplay interferes or prevents another persons. That's Eve, and it's up to you to fight back, adapt, whatever you have to do. It's not up to CCP to hold your hand.

Tali Ambraelle wrote:
5. Is it "game play" if they're AFK?
Yes.
This may be the only valid response, depending on who you ask, but it doesn't lend credit to either side.

TLDR: ITT the entitled generation (dear god, and I'm only 27)
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2012-10-24 19:06:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
CCP increased highsec safety with the explicit intent buffing the 'bumping miners' trade, I'm not sure where these accusations of abusing game mechanics comes from. Highsec safety mechanics are being used for their intended purpose (keeping ships safe from evil PVP and gankers), again I don't know how there is an issue over their use.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#110 - 2012-10-24 19:07:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Nanatoa wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Except that your shareholders were coerced by your extortion.


That is a blatant lie. As one of the largest shareholders, I can guarantee you that I parted with my 1.337 billion isk out of my own free will, because I appreciate what James 315 does and I want to endorse and support him and the New Order.


And that is why you're listed on his website as a top donor? Right Smile


How is that extortion, that's paramount to calling any real world business extortionists when they publish their shareholders reports.

Those of us that are shareholders are shareholders because James is providing content, whether you like his content or not is beside the point. In no way has James ever failed to deliver on his promise of dividends paid in lols and fun.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#111 - 2012-10-24 19:09:37 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
[
A flood of low end minerals, keeping high sec prices down, is undesirable. James is helping to curb an economic problem that exists in New Eden. It's just unfortunate that he's not able to have a larger impact, and that the only affordable option CCP allows is bumping. :(


False. Low prices ensure a vital economy as more players buy more things. Trade continues to flourish as the barrier of entry is low enough that anyone could be involved in any market they so choose from day 1 if they'd like.

He is not curbing problems, he is adding to them as a belligerence undesirable individual causing trouble. His "impact" is luckiyl minimal for now, but all tumors must be nipped before they grow. Smile

This is so wrong it's sad.

Thank god CCP has real economists that work on this stuff.

You just want CCP to ensure that high sec continues to maintain it's communist grip on industry in New Eden. First it was ganking, now it's bumping. You guys wont be happy untill all of New Eden has to succumb to your playstyle.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#112 - 2012-10-24 19:10:59 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
That's the thing about Eve, you are free to create your own world..

Yes and he did. An annoying one but he did.

Quote:
Nope he is playing the game, by definition that is gameplay, in this case its ]Emergent Gameplay[ which is a major selling point of Eve, CCP provide the tools, the players decide how to use them.

Not gameplay when paying customers are interrupted.

Quote:
I mine on an alt, I do actually sit there and watch the screen, I may have a small VLC window pinned on top in the corner or be using a pinned chrome window to watch youtube or browse the web but I'm always aware of my surroundings in Eve.

And that's wonderful for you. Some of us have lives and can't stare at a screen 24/7. We mine, then use it to build the ships you so eagerly use against us...wonder what would happen if we just stopped Smile

Quote:
You have exactly the same freedoms ingame as everyone else to affect others, it is a major selling point of Eve that each and every player has the potential to affect every other player either positively or negatively. I choose to support James315 because for every lost cycle due to bumping, my mining alts productivity/ISK ratio increases..

And what happens when you get bumped or popped by GSF hm? Not so good when the shoes on the other foot? Or what happens when someone else simply undercuts you to continue to ensure cheap goods to the rest of New Eden?Smile

Quote:
Nope, I will not be pushed out of hisec by any changes to the game apart from CCP giving into the demands for a completely safe & zero risk hisec.

And that is exactly how you'll be pushed out. CCP will protect it's earnings and income as opposed to allowing belligerent undesirable behavior Smile
Rollin Forties
School of Applied Street Knowledge
#113 - 2012-10-24 19:12:37 UTC
Quote:
And that is exactly how you'll be pushed out. CCP will protect it's earnings and income as opposed to allowing belligerent undesirable behavior


You're either a Troll or new here. People have been trying this since 2003, ain't happened yet.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2012-10-24 19:13:41 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
You just want CCP to ensure that high sec continues to maintain it's communist grip on industry in New Eden. First it was ganking, now it's bumping. You guys wont be happy untill all of New Eden has to succumb to your playstyle.


Once you stop threatening ours and demanding CCP nerfs highsec, then we'll stop Smile

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
How is that extortion, that's paramount to calling any real world business extortionists when they publish their shareholders reports.


You're very bad at analogies. How is;

1) Point gun at persons head
2) Hey I'll not hurt you if you pay me money
3) Money paid

a "business" and not extortion? Typical logic of the undesirables.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#115 - 2012-10-24 19:14:27 UTC
The miners who paid are laughing at you and profiting off your intransigence. Sounds like a valid means of economic warfare to me.

Best tear investment ever, by the way.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#116 - 2012-10-24 19:14:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Look, highsec safeties like CONCORD and dec shields and NPC corps are designed to protect players in the middle of PvE from being victim to PVP, right?

Since there is no player behind the keyboard of those being bumped, that means what James is doing is by definition PvE (thanks to his testing), and therefore is entitled to the all the protections that all other forms of highsec PvE currently enjoy. We don't want to increase risk in highsec after all, right?
Lord Calus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#117 - 2012-10-24 19:15:59 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Imports Plus wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
James is an undesirable deserving of ban for interrupting paying customers' game play.


Interrupting paying customers gameplay. This is without a doubt the most sickening thing I've ever read on these forums. Get over yourself.


No, you get over yourself. He is an undesirable hindering business, plain and simple.

Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Why should he have to pay a fee for a resource center that does not belong to this group?


In EVE, something belongs to you if you can defend it from outsiders.


Not in high sec, they're entitled, they're not bothering anyone. It's ok though, high sec will be made safer soon, and the undesirables will be pushed out :)


Liek, ohmaigoose!! When someone disrupts your gameplay you can whinge and get them banned? Liek kewlz guise!!

So here is my list, Im sure it will get longer.

Anyone who has shot my spaceboat.
Anyone who has threatened to violence my spaceboat.
The people who wouldn't let me killz dems!
When I'm not online for phat l3wtz kills.
Not having personal techmoon income for stuffs.
The red crosses that fit too much tank, and took too long to kill.
My lack of officer drops in highsec.
Not being given 100million SP at character creation.
Not being given unlimited iskies when at character creation.
Not being able to dock my supercaps.
Not being able to bring my supercaps into highsec.
My supercaps.

So ..... I guess I am asking CCP to ban themselves ... and me ... and everyone and everything else.
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#118 - 2012-10-24 19:18:06 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
How is that extortion, that's paramount to calling any real world business extortionists when they publish their shareholders reports.


I purchased 300m worth of shares a couple months ago because the isk is a pittance to me and his blog is amazing. threads such as this only cement my wise business decision.

This type of emergent gameplay needs to be supported and celebrated.

.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#119 - 2012-10-24 19:18:44 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
You just want CCP to ensure that high sec continues to maintain it's communist grip on industry in New Eden. First it was ganking, now it's bumping. You guys wont be happy untill all of New Eden has to succumb to your playstyle.


Once you stop threatening ours and demanding CCP nerfs highsec, then we'll stop Smile



I don't support nerfing high. Destructable asteroids would be a buff, and allow you the ability to retaliate against people like James315.
It coud actually drive up the price of minerals, which would be a buff to high sec miners and industrialists, as they could potentially make more money.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#120 - 2012-10-24 19:23:24 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Look, highsec safeties like CONCORD and dec shields and NPC corps are designed to protect players in the middle of PvE from being victim to PVP, right?

Since there is no player behind the keyboard of those being bumped, that means what James is doing is by definition PvE (thanks to his testing), and therefore is entitled to the all the protections that all other forms of highsec PvE currently enjoy. We don't want to increase risk in highsec after all, right?


incorrect, james and his crew bumps at the computer players constantly. not sure why this isn't clear to so many people.