These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why freighter bumping in High Sec is an exploit

First post
Author
Estrella Sheikh
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#301 - 2014-02-11 14:43:24 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:

War dec targets get to shoot back, titans are not in high sec so they can shoot back, anywhere besides high sec bumping and becoming suspect would be no different than it is currently. So why is that to hard to understand.


Because you can't bump war target with a neutral char and/or that never happens?

Quote:
If someone Jams you = fit ECCM to counter, Webs = prop mod to counter, Point = warp stab, tracking disruptor = tracking computer everything has a module counter for when another player takes away control of your ship Bumping = _______. Yep nothing.

_________ (get a buddy to bump him back / web you into warp)
Sorry, something.

But bumper is alone. Why should 2vs1 be acceptable counter method? Apparently, 1vs1 PVP is so stacked that bumper will ALWAYS win. Moreso, if he bumped you, webbing doesn't work anymore.


Shocked are you serious? you can't be serious? Is she serious?

You're really concerned about fair play when someone is preventing you from moving forward to your location? So let's say you have no friends but you have an alt that can fit a MWD cruiser in your corp... You're saying you would NOT get that alt there to help you because 2v1 against a bumper is unfair?

Stop.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#302 - 2014-02-11 14:45:02 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
There is freaking easy solution to the bumping problem that would only hurt gankers, and who cares about them, since they can still gank and only thing they lost is the fact that they need to be in the game to gank (what a ******* shocker):

Make bumping not work with your ship if you have green set up with concord (ie you want system to prohibit suspect and criminal actions). If you bump with green settings, you will be the one pushed away while target will not move. However, if you set up your settings to yellow or red, if you bump, it will be the same as now, but you will get suspect.

This is way TOO open to abuse and would completely destroy bumping as a game mechanic. Bumping causing damage is logical but again this would be open to abuse as you could potentially obliterate smaller ships, unless implementing Mournful Conciousness type of proposal (below).. I still say that freighters need fitting slots. If CCP gives them fitting slots and you fit cargo mods on them, I will laugh and ridicule you as much as the gankers do, when you die and cry. I do not think that they should have high slots or at least any turret/missle hardpoints. Fitting slots will not protect you from bumping, or at least would not prevent it. You will still need a webber. They would allow you to tank a freighter up to carry more (valuable) cargo before you cross the gank threshold.

Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Proposal: Three strikes and out.

Within a 60 second timeframe:
1st bump - ok
2nd bump - warning
3rd bump - bumper goes suspect

What constitutes a bump?

An impact with another ship in which:
1. your ship is accelerating or maintaining velocity
2. your extended direction vector intersects with the other ship
3. you have not engaged warp
4. (possibly required to cover corner cases) you are not in a freighter.



This could work. But the calculations in-game might cause Jita to lag even worse. i am only hypothesizing. It is a good idea.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#303 - 2014-02-11 14:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ammzi
People looking to nerf bumping are literally looking to simply buff freighters and make them more secure because they can't possibly warrant spending 1 PLEX a month to make their freighter 99 % gank secure against 10 other player accounts.

You are the absolute scum of EVE and against the very essence of it. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

"I am flying an expensive, harmless and slow ship with a very valuable cargo and I demand that I, me, myself and on my own can defend myself against 10 other ingame players/accounts - and I demand CCP do it for me. Why should I start a new account? Why should I bring friends? I am the VICTIM here, I DEMAND DEFENSES"
Cathy Mikakka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#304 - 2014-02-11 14:47:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Cathy Mikakka
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
There is freaking easy solution to the bumping problem that would only hurt gankers, and who cares about them, since they can still gank and only thing they lost is the fact that they need to be in the game to gank (what a ******* shocker):

Make bumping not work with your ship if you have green set up with concord (ie you want system to prohibit suspect and criminal actions). If you bump with green settings, you will be the one pushed away while target will not move. However, if you set up your settings to yellow or red, if you bump, it will be the same as now, but you will get suspect.

This is way TOO open to abuse and would completely destroy bumping as a game mechanic. Bumping causing damage is logical but again this would be open to abuse as you could potentially obliterate smaller ships, unless implementing Mournful Conciousness type of proposal (below).. I still say that freighters need fitting slots. If CCP gives them fitting slots and you fit cargo mods on them, I will laugh and ridicule you as much as the gankers do, when you die and cry. I do not think that they should have high slots or at least any turret/missle hardpoints. Fitting slots will not protect you from bumping, or at least would not prevent it. You will still need a webber. They would allow you to tank a freighter up to carry more (valuable) cargo before you cross the gank threshold.

Why would it be open to abuse? The only person you can abuse is yourself, if you set it to red or yellow. There is no way you can abuse anyone with that mechanics... And yes, it would destroy mechanics of bumping freighters, which is kinda point of that...

Estrella Sheikh: no, but apparently 1vs1 where one participant always wins is fair?
Cathy Mikakka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#305 - 2014-02-11 14:52:59 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
People looking to nerf bumping is literally looking to simply buff freighters and make them more secure because they can't possibly warrant spending 1 PLEX a month to make their freighter 99 % gank secure against 10 other player accounts.

You are the absolute scum of EVE and against the very essence of it. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

"I am flying an expensive, harmless and slow ship with a very valuable cargo and I demand that I, me, myself and on my own can defend myself against 10 other ingame players/accounts - and I demand CCP do it for me. Why should I start a new account? Why should I bring friends? I am the VICTIM here, I DEMAND DEFENSES"

You are the scum of the EvE. But don't worry, no one is taking your gank away, except now you have to, you know, play the game and gank, instead of having one guy bump till you finish your porn and grab a shower and show up in the game, ya know?
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
#306 - 2014-02-11 15:03:32 UTC
Emiko Rowna wrote:
Travasty Space wrote:
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
It's not being used in an unintended way.


So CCP introduced the bumping mechanic specifically so that gankers would be able to perma-bump freighters in high-sec instead of having to aggress (and get blown up by CONCORD) for using a point? Interesting analysis.


Perma bumping titans and such is allowed on the same permise.



When was the last time you bumped a titan to avoid CONCORD? Do tell


"Hey guys I'm bumping this dude I can't scram come quick to kill him!"

The exact same mechanic.
Estrella Sheikh
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#307 - 2014-02-11 15:06:56 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
There is freaking easy solution to the bumping problem that would only hurt gankers, and who cares about them, since they can still gank and only thing they lost is the fact that they need to be in the game to gank (what a ******* shocker):

Make bumping not work with your ship if you have green set up with concord (ie you want system to prohibit suspect and criminal actions). If you bump with green settings, you will be the one pushed away while target will not move. However, if you set up your settings to yellow or red, if you bump, it will be the same as now, but you will get suspect.

This is way TOO open to abuse and would completely destroy bumping as a game mechanic. Bumping causing damage is logical but again this would be open to abuse as you could potentially obliterate smaller ships, unless implementing Mournful Conciousness type of proposal (below).. I still say that freighters need fitting slots. If CCP gives them fitting slots and you fit cargo mods on them, I will laugh and ridicule you as much as the gankers do, when you die and cry. I do not think that they should have high slots or at least any turret/missle hardpoints. Fitting slots will not protect you from bumping, or at least would not prevent it. You will still need a webber. They would allow you to tank a freighter up to carry more (valuable) cargo before you cross the gank threshold.

Why would it be open to abuse? The only person you can abuse is yourself, if you set it to red or yellow. There is no way you can abuse anyone with that mechanics... And yes, it would destroy mechanics of bumping freighters, which is kinda point of that...

Estrella Sheikh: no, but apparently 1vs1 where one participant always wins is fair?


Eve is not fair. You adapt to your situation or you keep repeating your losses. You get into a situation where 1vs1 you don't have the advantage? You find a way to get yourself the advantage. You don't complain about something that's been proven already to not be an exploit.

If you don't want to take steps to get a leg up on the person being unfair then it's really nobody's problem but your own.

Stop looking at the situation as you vs bumper and consider it you vs everyone. Granted not everyone is out to get you, but there is a lot of people who are willing to push your ish in.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#308 - 2014-02-11 15:10:05 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:

But bumper is alone. Why should 2vs1 be acceptable counter method? Apparently, 1vs1 PVP is so stacked that bumper will ALWAYS win. Moreso, if he bumped you, webbing doesn't work anymore.


are u saying that if a hauler gets caught by an lone BC in low sec, it should be able to 1v1 its way out because its not acceptable for him to have to call friends?..... where do these guys come from? do they even read what they are saying?

why shouldnt it take friends to save a hauler thats been caught off guard by something specially designed to counter it?

if the bumper is alone, log off and come back in a little while. and ppl are still saying the pilot is stuck in his freighter once hes been bumped, but he can eject at any time. and yes, u can attack the bumper, yes it is an acceptable response. just like calling friends or having freinds with u in the first place is a good idea.

the problem with freighter fittings is not just capacity. its also the crazy amounts of extra tank everyone wants. more tank will increase the theshold of what is gankable, but it wont stop ganks. nor will it stop bumping, which is what many of u are saying is the real problem. all it encourages is for ppl to be even more wreckless with the amount they carry, because the meaningful choice of going over that thershold and increasing their risk or staying under that threshold and reducing their risk has been dumbed down. it basically rewards being dumb.

speedy freighters mean more goods get moved faster, the effort of moving items becomes less meaningful and inter-market traders make less money.

so if u give a freighters fittings, u have to nerf its capacity, tank and speed such that even min/max fits toward one attribute don't exceed thresholds that would mean carrying capitals, or dumb down hauling choices, or be detrimental to inter-market trading. to do that, would have to make them so u can only have one attribute to the current setting (or a little higher) at the expense of the other two, rather than what we have now which is all three attributes to the current setting.

the only thing ive seen even come close to this is giving freighters rigs. but u'd probably still end up with a nerfed freighter.

TL:DR freighters are perfect.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Estrella Sheikh
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#309 - 2014-02-11 15:12:14 UTC
Travasty Space wrote:
Emiko Rowna wrote:
Travasty Space wrote:
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
It's not being used in an unintended way.


So CCP introduced the bumping mechanic specifically so that gankers would be able to perma-bump freighters in high-sec instead of having to aggress (and get blown up by CONCORD) for using a point? Interesting analysis.


Perma bumping titans and such is allowed on the same permise.



When was the last time you bumped a titan to avoid CONCORD? Do tell


"Hey guys I'm bumping this dude I can't scram come quick to kill him!"

The exact same mechanic.


Lol When's the last time a Titan was tackled by a bumper in high sec? Or Low sec?

or.. ever?

Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#310 - 2014-02-11 15:37:32 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:

You are the scum of the EvE. But don't worry, no one is taking your gank away, except now you have to, you know, play the game and gank, instead of having one guy bump till you finish your **** and grab a shower and show up in the game, ya know?


His fault for being valuable, his fault for not webbing himself into warp.
His fault for not having friends like the gankers do.

The bumper is spending time there as well, you know? Like he has to actually work for it and spend time keeping the other guy in place. And it only takes one other guy on the freighter's side to avoid being bumped.

But no, you'd rather have everything served to you on a silver platter, maybe WoW is a good game to try?
Cathy Mikakka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#311 - 2014-02-11 15:47:26 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:

You are the scum of the EvE. But don't worry, no one is taking your gank away, except now you have to, you know, play the game and gank, instead of having one guy bump till you finish your **** and grab a shower and show up in the game, ya know?


His fault for being valuable, his fault for not webbing himself into warp.
His fault for not having friends like the gankers do.

The bumper is spending time there as well, you know? Like he has to actually work for it and spend time keeping the other guy in place. And it only takes one other guy on the freighter's side to avoid being bumped.

But no, you'd rather have everything served to you on a silver platter, maybe WoW is a good game to try?


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

FYI even empty freighter is being ganked, not only those who load 10b ISK inside.

Daichy Yamato: Simply no. Ejecting is not an option.

Problem with bumping is that there is no defense. You say webbing, but that happens before bumping. Once bumping is in place, you are ******. Simple as that. You say, attack the bumper, no. This is not correct way. You want your friends to gank the ganker? So they lose ships for no value (bumper doesn't drop much) and their security status? Are you insane?!
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#312 - 2014-02-11 16:03:07 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

FYI even empty freighter is being ganked, not only those who load 10b ISK inside.

Daichy Yamato: Simply no. Ejecting is not an option.

Problem with bumping is that there is no defense. You say webbing, but that happens before bumping. Once bumping is in place, you are ******. Simple as that. You say, attack the bumper, no. This is not correct way. You want your friends to gank the ganker? So they lose ships for no value (bumper doesn't drop much) and their security status? Are you insane?!


I was being serious about WoW.
Mistakes happen, once we ganked a freighter as a trial-run to get everyone up to speed on how things works. Once we ganked a freighter we thought was carrying 4b, but mistakes were made by the scanner.

Webbing should be applied before bumping. Just like you should get vaccines before getting exposed to disease.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#313 - 2014-02-11 16:23:02 UTC
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
There is freaking easy solution to the bumping problem that would only hurt gankers, and who cares about them, since they can still gank and only thing they lost is the fact that they need to be in the game to gank (what a ******* shocker):

Make bumping not work with your ship if you have green set up with concord (ie you want system to prohibit suspect and criminal actions). If you bump with green settings, you will be the one pushed away while target will not move. However, if you set up your settings to yellow or red, if you bump, it will be the same as now, but you will get suspect.

This is way TOO open to abuse and would completely destroy bumping as a game mechanic. Bumping causing damage is logical but again this would be open to abuse as you could potentially obliterate smaller ships, unless implementing Mournful Conciousness type of proposal (below).. I still say that freighters need fitting slots. If CCP gives them fitting slots and you fit cargo mods on them, I will laugh and ridicule you as much as the gankers do, when you die and cry. I do not think that they should have high slots or at least any turret/missle hardpoints. Fitting slots will not protect you from bumping, or at least would not prevent it. You will still need a webber. They would allow you to tank a freighter up to carry more (valuable) cargo before you cross the gank threshold.

Why would it be open to abuse? The only person you can abuse is yourself, if you set it to red or yellow. There is no way you can abuse anyone with that mechanics... And yes, it would destroy mechanics of bumping freighters, which is kinda point of that...

Estrella Sheikh: no, but apparently 1vs1 where one participant always wins is fair?

Because then anyone could set to green and be bump free. It would make engageable station gamers more powerful and annoying. You would not be able to knock them off the docking ring for one. For two, it would be much more difficult to prevent an opponent from burning to the gate to avoid being killed.
Motoko Innocentius
Domus Dei
#314 - 2014-02-11 16:26:50 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

FYI even empty freighter is being ganked, not only those who load 10b ISK inside.

Daichy Yamato: Simply no. Ejecting is not an option.

Problem with bumping is that there is no defense. You say webbing, but that happens before bumping. Once bumping is in place, you are ******. Simple as that. You say, attack the bumper, no. This is not correct way. You want your friends to gank the ganker? So they lose ships for no value (bumper doesn't drop much) and their security status? Are you insane?!


I was being serious about WoW.
Mistakes happen, once we ganked a freighter as a trial-run to get everyone up to speed on how things works. Once we ganked a freighter we thought was carrying 4b, but mistakes were made by the scanner.

Webbing should be applied before bumping. Just like you should get vaccines before getting exposed to disease.


So, do give a good reason why freighter bumping in hisec to disallow leaving grid needs to be allowed for a ganker?

Scrambler and disruptor does the same thing, disallows leaving grid. The time it takes for a freighter to get back to stargate is longer than the time it takes concord to kill the suiciders. So what is it that bumping is required for in hisec freighter killing (you know, what this threads about)
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#315 - 2014-02-11 16:27:57 UTC
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
There is freaking easy solution to the bumping problem that would only hurt gankers, and who cares about them, since they can still gank and only thing they lost is the fact that they need to be in the game to gank (what a ******* shocker):

Make bumping not work with your ship if you have green set up with concord (ie you want system to prohibit suspect and criminal actions). If you bump with green settings, you will be the one pushed away while target will not move. However, if you set up your settings to yellow or red, if you bump, it will be the same as now, but you will get suspect.

This is way TOO open to abuse and would completely destroy bumping as a game mechanic. Bumping causing damage is logical but again this would be open to abuse as you could potentially obliterate smaller ships, unless implementing Mournful Conciousness type of proposal (below).. I still say that freighters need fitting slots. If CCP gives them fitting slots and you fit cargo mods on them, I will laugh and ridicule you as much as the gankers do, when you die and cry. I do not think that they should have high slots or at least any turret/missle hardpoints. Fitting slots will not protect you from bumping, or at least would not prevent it. You will still need a webber. They would allow you to tank a freighter up to carry more (valuable) cargo before you cross the gank threshold.

Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Proposal: Three strikes and out.

Within a 60 second timeframe:
1st bump - ok
2nd bump - warning
3rd bump - bumper goes suspect

What constitutes a bump?

An impact with another ship in which:
1. your ship is accelerating or maintaining velocity
2. your extended direction vector intersects with the other ship
3. you have not engaged warp
4. (possibly required to cover corner cases) you are not in a freighter.



This could work. But the calculations in-game might cause Jita to lag even worse. i am only hypothesizing. It is a good idea.


I have written 3d game code, including rigid body simulation code. I can assure you that the increase in server load would be negligible. By far the largest cost is in detecting the initial collision, which is already being done. This is a computing problem that increases geometrically with the number of ships on grid (since they must all compare distance to each other every frame).

point 1 is a simple state test (is target speed >= current speed?)

point 2 is an intersect test of a vector against a bounding sphere - the simplest kind. The number of calculations and comparisons are small.

point 3 is a state test

point 4 is a state test

Imagine a case where there are 1000 ships on grid. There are roughly 250,000 collision detections taking place per frame (since A colides B is the same as B collides A). If only one collision happens, the new checks would get invoked once. So let's call that 250,001 calculations. A negligible increase of 0.000025% in computing time.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#316 - 2014-02-11 16:33:51 UTC
Motoko Innocentius wrote:


So, do give a good reason why freighter bumping in hisec to disallow leaving grid needs to be allowed for a ganker?

Scrambler and disruptor does the same thing, disallows leaving grid. The time it takes for a freighter to get back to stargate is longer than the time it takes concord to kill the suiciders. So what is it that bumping is required for in hisec freighter killing (you know, what this threads about)


It's called emergent gameplay and is one of the key selling features of EVE: The Sandbox
If you want to kill emergent gameplay you are going to be in a lot of trouble because either you do it from a "moral point of view" which is very, very bad (do I have to explain why?) or you just nerf all emergent gameplay - which FYI putting up POS in wormholes is (CCP never expected people wanting to live there).

Regardless, taking bumping away will not prevent ganking - it will only constitute to slightly raising the prices of ganks, which in turn means more people will be hauling much more expensive stuff. Just like a system in equilibrium which is put out of balance due to a change in composition, it will re-instate the balance and things will be back to normal.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#317 - 2014-02-11 16:36:11 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
the problem with freighter fittings is not just capacity. its also the crazy amounts of extra tank everyone wants. more tank will increase the theshold of what is gankable, but it wont stop ganks. nor will it stop bumping, which is what many of u are saying is the real problem. all it encourages is for ppl to be even more wreckless with the amount they carry, because the meaningful choice of going over that thershold and increasing their risk or staying under that threshold and reducing their risk has been dumbed down. it basically rewards being dumb.

That is the same choice almost every other ship in the game has to make. It would help the smart and punish the ignorant, so their would be little to no change in game play.

Quote:
speedy freighters mean more goods get moved faster, the effort of moving items becomes less meaningful and inter-market traders make less money.

a webbing alt already accomplishes this and mods/rigs would never substantially improve speed. Just look at current industrials to know that.

Quote:
so if u give a freighters fittings, u have to nerf its capacity, tank and speed such that even min/max fits toward one attribute don't exceed thresholds that would mean carrying capitals, or dumb down hauling choices, or be detrimental to inter-market trading. to do that, would have to make them so u can only have one attribute to the current setting (or a little higher) at the expense of the other two, rather than what we have now which is all three attributes to the current setting.

This is one option, their are many ways around this if CCP makes it so. A heavily tanked freighter may still push the bounds of ganking limits. Just like with miner gankers, the freighter gankers would have to use a calculator to make that call. Instead of just copy and pasting cargo values, they would also have to establish EHP and so forth. Really its the gankers who are ALSO using dumb down play. ( x cargo value = gank -set number of ships required based on hull-. ) should have to do more math ( x cargo value + freighter EHP = gank+ number of ships required )
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#318 - 2014-02-11 16:39:25 UTC
JetStream Drenard wrote:

This is one option, their are many ways around this if CCP makes it so. A heavily tanked freighter may still push the bounds of ganking limits. Just like with miner gankers, the freighter gankers would have to use a calculator to make that call. Instead of just copy and pasting cargo values, they would also have to establish EHP and so forth. Really its the gankers who are ALSO using dumb down play. ( x cargo value = gank -set number of ships required based on hull-. ) should have to do more math ( x cargo value + freighter EHP = gank+ number of ships required )


This is already being done with orcas. Orcas can tank anywhere from 4-5 to 30 catalysts depending on their fitting.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#319 - 2014-02-11 16:46:31 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
JetStream Drenard wrote:

This is one option, their are many ways around this if CCP makes it so. A heavily tanked freighter may still push the bounds of ganking limits. Just like with miner gankers, the freighter gankers would have to use a calculator to make that call. Instead of just copy and pasting cargo values, they would also have to establish EHP and so forth. Really its the gankers who are ALSO using dumb down play. ( x cargo value = gank -set number of ships required based on hull-. ) should have to do more math ( x cargo value + freighter EHP = gank+ number of ships required )


This is already being done with orcas. Orcas can tank anywhere from 4-5 to 30 catalysts depending on their fitting.

exactly my point. orca ganking requires these computations, why should not a freighter?
Motoko Innocentius
Domus Dei
#320 - 2014-02-11 16:47:11 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Motoko Innocentius wrote:


So, do give a good reason why freighter bumping in hisec to disallow leaving grid needs to be allowed for a ganker?

Scrambler and disruptor does the same thing, disallows leaving grid. The time it takes for a freighter to get back to stargate is longer than the time it takes concord to kill the suiciders. So what is it that bumping is required for in hisec freighter killing (you know, what this threads about)


It's called emergent gameplay and is one of the key selling features of EVE: The Sandbox
If you want to kill emergent gameplay you are going to be in a lot of trouble because either you do it from a "moral point of view" which is very, very bad (do I have to explain why?) or you just nerf all emergent gameplay - which FYI putting up POS in wormholes is (CCP never expected people wanting to live there).

Regardless, taking bumping away will not prevent ganking - it will only constitute to slightly raising the prices of ganks, which in turn means more people will be hauling much more expensive stuff. Just like a system in equilibrium which is put out of balance due to a change in composition, it will re-instate the balance and things will be back to normal.


So what you're saying is, it's harder to gank if you can't just start bumping someone and gank when you've gotten all your friends in place? Sounds like you want to make ganking easier, how bout you try wow?

Guess you're just another ganker that wants ccp to do their job for them.