These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

When will the GM team be producing their response to the Miner Bumping Discussion Thread?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#101 - 2013-01-07 20:45:03 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Mine aligned to another part of the belt or to another belt. Warp when a bumper approaches. Bumping solved by being ATK.

Exactly the same tactic that has always provided guaranteed safety from gankers.


This shows that you are nothing but biased and have no real credible opinion. This doesn't work with ice mining, which is what they target. You would never be able to complete a cycle. Problem not solved. Roll Typical belligerent undesirable thinking...

Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Depends on the skill of the bumper and the bumpee.

Or the miner could just pay 10 million ISK and that's it.


No, it doesn't. It's either get bumped or pay. Extortion, risk free extortion. Filth.


You could also MINE ELSEWHERE. Like in another system where the new order is not active. It's not that damn hard.
Randolph Rothstein
whatever corp.
#102 - 2013-01-07 20:45:11 UTC
now now

lets not pretend like there arent people who bump others not because they particularly like spaceship mmo interaction but because they like to annoy others - there are a55holes like that who would do anything if it made someone else mad - thats griefing

fortunately for them its hard to prove,but i bet everyone knows such individuals Blink
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2013-01-07 20:45:45 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
No there isn't. I can harass you according to your definition (or interpretation of the OED's definition) as much as I like ingame, so long as I don't harass you according to CCP's definition. Smile


Further delusions! Hahaha. My definition? It is the definition of the world. Not only are you an undesirable in Eve, but even in the real world! How wonderful to know Smile

RubyPorto wrote:

Even with Ice mining, it takes less time to relock after warping somewhere you're aligned to than slowboating back from wherever you've been bumped to.

Or just pay the 10m ISK.

Or mine Ore if Ice mining is too "risky."


Clearly, you do not know how Ice Mining works. Please talk more and continue to discredit yourself Smile
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#104 - 2013-01-07 20:48:05 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
To reiterate on what people have said, this is still being discussed given the fact its a seen as a "widespread issue" by a lot of people.

....

I've given the GM Team a heads up regarding this thread Smile



CCP reads forums, yay!

AFK mining buff, nooooo !!!

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#105 - 2013-01-07 20:48:17 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Clearly, you do not know how Ice Mining works. Please talk more and continue to discredit yourself Smile


yes, ice mining is very complex

step 1: fit a mackinaw
step 2: undock, warp to ice field
step 3: lock ice, f1-f2
step 4: one whole hour later, move ice to orca

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Aracimia Wolfe
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#106 - 2013-01-07 20:49:03 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
The subject of "bumping in Eve" and "charging rent in Monopoly" are not even in the same relm in regard to gameplay.

Bumping in non-combat situations is an emergent form of harassment allowed by loose gampley rules.
Charging rent is on the other hand, is a clearly written mechanic of gameplay.

One is allowed by loose rules, the other is a specific game mechanic. Trying to equate the two is simply, silly.


Bumping is a specific game mechanic. CCP specifically included collisions as a game mechanic. Some space games do not have collision detection at all.

Both are quite specific game mechanics. But people playing monopoly understand that they're playing with other people who might sometimes cause them in-game inconvenience. People complaining about bumping do not seem to understand that.


And this is what gets me.

It's the sense of entitlement. The instantaneous cry of "harrassment" as if they were in a single player game and in a risk free space game. Even X-BTF wasn't that risk free. At First Twisted

They feel they don't have a defence, fine thats cool, to an extent I think there might be a valid point there. A good bumper is nigh impossible to avoid. Then again lets take a look at the "Scam" itself. 10 mill for 365 days, Christ I fart more than that doing l4's and mining is way more lucrative (I know I've tried it) So what are the options.

Pay up, go somewhere else or find an alternative method to combat the agressors.

That first one appears to be a point of nothing more than pride. The Second appears to be nothing more than stubbornness and the last one would necessitate the banding together of people which appears to be outside their capabilities, so lets cry for CCP instead. Sheesh.

O,k Dialing back the rant a bit, and ignoring completely the cries of the space lawyer inclined (seriously, you're being that guy, you know who you are, don't be that guy.)

Surely it would be better all round than instead of crying harassment or griefing to actually give CCP some positive feedback and sensible ideas? Instead of sticking your hands out place some good ideas in the pot.

Someone a while back mentioned an anchoring module, kind of like a seige module for ships making them much harder to move. Great idea I felt.

Takes power and a module, be bumped or stay still at the loss of tank/cargo/speed e.t.c

Kill it with Fire!

Boudacca Sangrere
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#107 - 2013-01-07 20:55:53 UTC
Aracimia Wolfe wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
The subject of "bumping in Eve" and "charging rent in Monopoly" are not even in the same relm in regard to gameplay.

Bumping in non-combat situations is an emergent form of harassment allowed by loose gampley rules.
Charging rent is on the other hand, is a clearly written mechanic of gameplay.

One is allowed by loose rules, the other is a specific game mechanic. Trying to equate the two is simply, silly.


Bumping is a specific game mechanic. CCP specifically included collisions as a game mechanic. Some space games do not have collision detection at all.

Both are quite specific game mechanics. But people playing monopoly understand that they're playing with other people who might sometimes cause them in-game inconvenience. People complaining about bumping do not seem to understand that.


And this is what gets me.

It's the sense of entitlement. The instantaneous cry of "harrassment" as if they were in a single player game and in a risk free space game. Even X-BTF wasn't that risk free. At First Twisted

They feel they don't have a defence, fine thats cool, to an extent I think there might be a valid point there. A good bumper is nigh impossible to avoid. Then again lets take a look at the "Scam" itself. 10 mill for 365 days, Christ I fart more than that doing l4's and mining is way more lucrative (I know I've tried it) So what are the options.

Pay up, go somewhere else or find an alternative method to combat the agressors.

That first one appears to be a point of nothing more than pride. The Second appears to be nothing more than stubbornness and the last one would necessitate the banding together of people which appears to be outside their capabilities, so lets cry for CCP instead. Sheesh.

O,k Dialing back the rant a bit, and ignoring completely the cries of the space lawyer inclined (seriously, you're being that guy, you know who you are, don't be that guy.)

Surely it would be better all round than instead of crying harassment or griefing to actually give CCP some positive feedback and sensible ideas? Instead of sticking your hands out place some good ideas in the pot.

Someone a while back mentioned an anchoring module, kind of like a seige module for ships making them much harder to move. Great idea I felt.

Takes power and a module, be bumped or stay still at the loss of tank/cargo/speed e.t.c



I am sorry, but that is just silly. Your solution is to give each bumper 10 mil. and trust them not to bump you for a year. Sure honey, if that is what you truely belive I got a..(insert Jita scam du jure) to sell.


B,
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#108 - 2013-01-07 21:01:50 UTC
Boudacca Sangrere wrote:
Aracimia Wolfe wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
The subject of "bumping in Eve" and "charging rent in Monopoly" are not even in the same relm in regard to gameplay.

Bumping in non-combat situations is an emergent form of harassment allowed by loose gampley rules.
Charging rent is on the other hand, is a clearly written mechanic of gameplay.

One is allowed by loose rules, the other is a specific game mechanic. Trying to equate the two is simply, silly.


Bumping is a specific game mechanic. CCP specifically included collisions as a game mechanic. Some space games do not have collision detection at all.

Both are quite specific game mechanics. But people playing monopoly understand that they're playing with other people who might sometimes cause them in-game inconvenience. People complaining about bumping do not seem to understand that.


And this is what gets me.

It's the sense of entitlement. The instantaneous cry of "harrassment" as if they were in a single player game and in a risk free space game. Even X-BTF wasn't that risk free. At First Twisted

They feel they don't have a defence, fine thats cool, to an extent I think there might be a valid point there. A good bumper is nigh impossible to avoid. Then again lets take a look at the "Scam" itself. 10 mill for 365 days, Christ I fart more than that doing l4's and mining is way more lucrative (I know I've tried it) So what are the options.

Pay up, go somewhere else or find an alternative method to combat the agressors.

That first one appears to be a point of nothing more than pride. The Second appears to be nothing more than stubbornness and the last one would necessitate the banding together of people which appears to be outside their capabilities, so lets cry for CCP instead. Sheesh.

O,k Dialing back the rant a bit, and ignoring completely the cries of the space lawyer inclined (seriously, you're being that guy, you know who you are, don't be that guy.)

Surely it would be better all round than instead of crying harassment or griefing to actually give CCP some positive feedback and sensible ideas? Instead of sticking your hands out place some good ideas in the pot.

Someone a while back mentioned an anchoring module, kind of like a seige module for ships making them much harder to move. Great idea I felt.

Takes power and a module, be bumped or stay still at the loss of tank/cargo/speed e.t.c



I am sorry, but that is just silly. Your solution is to give each bumper 10 mil. and trust them not to bump you for a year. Sure honey, if that is what you truely belive I got a..(insert Jita scam du jure) to sell.


B,


Move to another system. It's free.
Boudacca Sangrere
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#109 - 2013-01-07 21:07:29 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Boudacca Sangrere wrote:
Aracimia Wolfe wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
The subject of "bumping in Eve" and "charging rent in Monopoly" are not even in the same relm in regard to gameplay.

Bumping in non-combat situations is an emergent form of harassment allowed by loose gampley rules.
Charging rent is on the other hand, is a clearly written mechanic of gameplay.

One is allowed by loose rules, the other is a specific game mechanic. Trying to equate the two is simply, silly.


Bumping is a specific game mechanic. CCP specifically included collisions as a game mechanic. Some space games do not have collision detection at all.

Both are quite specific game mechanics. But people playing monopoly understand that they're playing with other people who might sometimes cause them in-game inconvenience. People complaining about bumping do not seem to understand that.


And this is what gets me.

It's the sense of entitlement. The instantaneous cry of "harrassment" as if they were in a single player game and in a risk free space game. Even X-BTF wasn't that risk free. At First Twisted

They feel they don't have a defence, fine thats cool, to an extent I think there might be a valid point there. A good bumper is nigh impossible to avoid. Then again lets take a look at the "Scam" itself. 10 mill for 365 days, Christ I fart more than that doing l4's and mining is way more lucrative (I know I've tried it) So what are the options.

Pay up, go somewhere else or find an alternative method to combat the agressors.

That first one appears to be a point of nothing more than pride. The Second appears to be nothing more than stubbornness and the last one would necessitate the banding together of people which appears to be outside their capabilities, so lets cry for CCP instead. Sheesh.

O,k Dialing back the rant a bit, and ignoring completely the cries of the space lawyer inclined (seriously, you're being that guy, you know who you are, don't be that guy.)

Surely it would be better all round than instead of crying harassment or griefing to actually give CCP some positive feedback and sensible ideas? Instead of sticking your hands out place some good ideas in the pot.

Someone a while back mentioned an anchoring module, kind of like a seige module for ships making them much harder to move. Great idea I felt.

Takes power and a module, be bumped or stay still at the loss of tank/cargo/speed e.t.c



I am sorry, but that is just silly. Your solution is to give each bumper 10 mil. and trust them not to bump you for a year. Sure honey, if that is what you truely belive I got a..(insert Jita scam du jure) to sell.


B,


Move to another system. It's free.


Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Replacing one dumb idea with another seems to be though.

B.
Lord Leftfield
Doomheim
#110 - 2013-01-07 21:34:39 UTC
i think i just sputterd coffe all over the screen when i saw a isd member write that trolling on GD was prohibited Lol

Life is just a 420 all the way home :) Please give me more of that chocolate brew!!
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#111 - 2013-01-07 21:44:11 UTC
I'm playing this game, and in this game I sell materials gained from mining ice.

Now, since I want the most profit possible, I use valid game mechanics to keep other players from mining ice in my area (unless they pay me a fee).

What part of this could possibly be considered griefing or harrassment either in game or outside it?

To any sane person, none of it.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Aracimia Wolfe
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#112 - 2013-01-07 22:09:04 UTC
Boudacca Sangrere wrote:
Aracimia Wolfe wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
The subject of "bumping in Eve" and "charging rent in Monopoly" are not even in the same relm in regard to gameplay.

Bumping in non-combat situations is an emergent form of harassment allowed by loose gampley rules.
Charging rent is on the other hand, is a clearly written mechanic of gameplay.

One is allowed by loose rules, the other is a specific game mechanic. Trying to equate the two is simply, silly.


Bumping is a specific game mechanic. CCP specifically included collisions as a game mechanic. Some space games do not have collision detection at all.

Both are quite specific game mechanics. But people playing monopoly understand that they're playing with other people who might sometimes cause them in-game inconvenience. People complaining about bumping do not seem to understand that.


And this is what gets me.

It's the sense of entitlement. The instantaneous cry of "harrassment" as if they were in a single player game and in a risk free space game. Even X-BTF wasn't that risk free. At First Twisted

They feel they don't have a defence, fine thats cool, to an extent I think there might be a valid point there. A good bumper is nigh impossible to avoid. Then again lets take a look at the "Scam" itself. 10 mill for 365 days, Christ I fart more than that doing l4's and mining is way more lucrative (I know I've tried it) So what are the options.

Pay up, go somewhere else or find an alternative method to combat the agressors.

That first one appears to be a point of nothing more than pride. The Second appears to be nothing more than stubbornness and the last one would necessitate the banding together of people which appears to be outside their capabilities, so lets cry for CCP instead. Sheesh.

O,k Dialing back the rant a bit, and ignoring completely the cries of the space lawyer inclined (seriously, you're being that guy, you know who you are, don't be that guy.)

Surely it would be better all round than instead of crying harassment or griefing to actually give CCP some positive feedback and sensible ideas? Instead of sticking your hands out place some good ideas in the pot.

Someone a while back mentioned an anchoring module, kind of like a seige module for ships making them much harder to move. Great idea I felt.

Takes power and a module, be bumped or stay still at the loss of tank/cargo/speed e.t.c



I am sorry, but that is just silly. Your solution is to give each bumper 10 mil. and trust them not to bump you for a year. Sure honey, if that is what you truely belive I got a..(insert Jita scam du jure) to sell.


B,


Tell you what sweety, how about you read all the post and then take an affirmative action on what I wrote at the end. it'll save you looking any sillier pumpkin.

Kill it with Fire!

Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2013-01-07 22:10:22 UTC
Just as a quick aside:

Ruby, I'm extremely glad to see you back on your proper spacedude. Grats on that and never stop doing your thing.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#114 - 2013-01-07 22:44:56 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I'm playing this game, and in this game I sell materials gained from mining ice.

Now, since I want the most profit possible, I use valid game mechanics to keep other players from mining ice in my area (unless they pay me a fee).

What part of this could possibly be considered griefing or harrassment either in game or outside it?

To any sane person, none of it.


Given the nerf to ganking this is the only realistic option left too.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#115 - 2013-01-07 23:04:29 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:

This shows that you are nothing but biased and have no real credible opinion. This doesn't work with ice mining, which is what they target. You would never be able to complete a cycle. Problem not solved. Roll Typical belligerent undesirable thinking...


Then orbit the ice you're mining from. For a bumper, a moving ship is far less of a target than a stationary one. Do you completely lack any imagination? Christ, you lot really are the mindless F1 punchers of highsec.

Drones on auto-aggro for rats [X] CHECK
Roid in range of laz0rz [X] CHECK
Punch F1...F3 [X] CHECK
Drool all over yourself while ore hold fills [X] CHECK and CHECK

Extra Credit: Maybe plead in local to mooch off someone's Orca boosts.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#116 - 2013-01-07 23:28:18 UTC
Boudacca Sangrere wrote:

Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Replacing one dumb idea with another seems to be though.

B.




I have not seen a single bumper in months while mining. If you spit on the very easy way to avoind the new order, you should not be blaming anyone for this problem. Deal with it or move. Bumperless mining belts are just a few clicks away.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#117 - 2013-01-07 23:44:56 UTC
Guarantee bumping miners will be considered griefing by this time next week. That sure will resolve the problem too.

I mean it's not like the entire thing was caused by the nerf to excessive buffs to mining barge EHP or anything and even if it was you can't do anything that would upset the miners.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#118 - 2013-01-08 00:18:45 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Guarantee bumping miners will be considered griefing by this time next week. That sure will resolve the problem too.

I mean it's not like the entire thing was caused by the nerf to excessive buffs to mining barge EHP or anything and even if it was you can't do anything that would upset the miners.


If the small minority of whiners think it's bad now, wait and see how much we ramp up suicide ganking ops if bumping does magically become an exploit. Will we be back here in 6 months because of epic whining about suicide ganking? Will CCP suddenly rule that an exploit? What about the awoxing that we're sure to employ if ganking gets banned?

Still, hopefully, the GMs will look at the facts and see that our "victims" clearly have sufficient tools at their disposal to defend themselves already.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Kory DarkHeart
CareBear Cowboys.
#119 - 2013-01-08 04:55:53 UTC
I am new to eve, so missed out on the original post Cry

I have and will do it again - bumping miners.
For a new player that has no skills I found it the only way to defend myself against those lesser players that sit in hi sec mining in the big mining ships (barges I think they are called). IMO they should be in 0.6 and lower as they have the skills, play the game.

Why I bumped as a new player. I was doing the tutorial and had to mine same ore, warped to a belt and there was two barges mining. I moved to the other side of the belt so as not to get in there way. One of the players moved across the belt (aprox 25km to my position and stated to mine the rock I was. OK they were here first and it might be their area.

So I started to mine another one and then that player started to mine that one I was doing - WTF
So I bumped and bumped and bumped.

I hope they keep it as is, eve has a multitude of options and its the lazy that want it changed instead of looking for an ingame solution. Don't turn eve into a WOW pandora baby game.




                      "Find something fun to do and do it" - Darius Johnson_ : Goonswarm_
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
#120 - 2013-01-08 05:13:06 UTC
Kory DarkHeart wrote:
I am new to eve, so missed out on the original post Cry

I have and will do it again - bumping miners.
For a new player that has no skills I found it the only way to defend myself against those lesser players that sit in hi sec mining in the big mining ships (barges I think they are called). IMO they should be in 0.6 and lower as they have the skills, play the game.

Why I bumped as a new player. I was doing the tutorial and had to mine same ore, warped to a belt and there was two barges mining. I moved to the other side of the belt so as not to get in there way. One of the players moved across the belt (aprox 25km to my position and stated to mine the rock I was. OK they were here first and it might be their area.

So I started to mine another one and then that player started to mine that one I was doing - WTF
So I bumped and bumped and bumped.

I hope they keep it as is, eve has a multitude of options and its the lazy that want it changed instead of looking for an ingame solution. Don't turn eve into a WOW pandora baby game.






You. You're a good pilot. This ladies and gentlemen is what we need. Miners bumping the bots and bot-aspirants so they have a shot at making an isk.