These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jill Chastot
WE FORM BL0B Inc.
Goonswarm Federation
#561 - 2014-02-17 21:36:14 UTC
Amarisen Gream wrote:
They just need to add a physics / real mass to the game. This would change a lot of things > bumbling of smaller ships to bigger ships would not work, thanks to mass. Collision of weapon fire against things in space.
Real physics in EVE would be final answer to this > but with real physics/mass in game, CCP would need to look at ways to change game play to balance it.
i.e. Smarter missiles/rockets which could move around items in space.
i.e. nearly everything in space would need to be distractible by weapon fire. (we can keep NPC stations immune to player fire) plus > the fact that collision damage shouldn't trigger timers on containers and other things in space.



I forsee nodes being limited to 100 players again....

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."
SKINE DMZ
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#562 - 2014-02-17 22:13:19 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:

the sand box arguments are boring? dnt play in a game thats a sandbox then. blapping a bumper is a solution, its just one ur not willing to use. and thats fair enough, no work, no reward.

You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time.

I disagree
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#563 - 2014-02-17 23:05:15 UTC
Jill Chastot wrote:
Mag's wrote:


...Fat load of quotes and stuff...

You may not like certain options, but hey, welcome to Eve.


I think the question here is less that are there things to do, but are they feasible to actually acomplish in a realistic situation.



yes

SKINE DMZ wrote:
You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time.


THEN it SHould bE JUSt FiNE if a SINgle plaYER can gANK A freiGHteR tHen. BECaUse itS so UnFAir thaT A single PLAyer NEEds a SeCOND plaYER to BE abLE tO GANk A freIGHTER. THats greAT lOGic HurR HUrr.

reading is fine, my logic is undeniable and thats not bad game design. especially when the first guy could have taken measures to not get bumped in the first place. he screwed up, now he needs a friend to help him out of his own incompetence. its a situation not unheard of in both eve and real life.

its a pretty straightforward rock paper scissors situation.

running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...

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
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#564 - 2014-02-17 23:20:11 UTC
Gah...... this thread just...... gah my head. Please lock already.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
DSpite Culhach
#565 - 2014-02-18 03:18:25 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Jill Chastot wrote:
Mag's wrote:


...Fat load of quotes and stuff...

You may not like certain options, but hey, welcome to Eve.


I think the question here is less that are there things to do, but are they feasible to actually acomplish in a realistic situation.



yes

SKINE DMZ wrote:
You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time.


THEN it SHould bE JUSt FiNE if a SINgle plaYER can gANK A freiGHteR tHen. BECaUse itS so UnFAir thaT A single PLAyer NEEds a SeCOND plaYER to BE abLE tO GANk A freIGHTER. THats greAT lOGic HurR HUrr.

reading is fine, my logic is undeniable and thats not bad game design. especially when the first guy could have taken measures to not get bumped in the first place. he screwed up, now he needs a friend to help him out of his own incompetence. its a situation not unheard of in both eve and real life.

its a pretty straightforward rock paper scissors situation.

running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...


I think you will find that ONE player can already kill a freighter. You can get a frigate, scram one, orbit it, and go make some coffee. It has no modules and will eventually die.

What is being discussed here is whether the ability to carry out what is in fact the equivalent of a scram via the action of "bumping", without actually setting off any aggressions flags has proper merits.

Also, I think you fill find that in Rock-Paper-Scissor, both sides go at the same time. With a Freighter, you already know I'm going to play Rock and you always show up and counter with paper. Give freighter modules and we can discuss this point again.

You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.

I'm not here to advocate for either one side or the other, I'm trying to point out that because CCP needed to make hisec "safe", they have created this nightmare side effects, and people just "abuse" them just a hair short of making CCP intervene. Login traps, bumping, can baiting, shooting players Personal Depots, the list goes on. Some are "fixed" some are "working as intended", it's still silly mechanics though.




I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#566 - 2014-02-18 03:32:22 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.

I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#567 - 2014-02-18 03:33:02 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:


running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...

Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
DSpite Culhach
#568 - 2014-02-18 03:55:16 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.

I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping.


Really? Because as far as I know, the gankers would just need to use 2-3 bumping frigs instead of one. Is your idea to "counter-gank" the bumping ships? I'm pretty sure everyone here could fit a 100MN MWD Tengu to actually have more EHP then the freighter it's bumping. Good like killing that with "4-6" destroyers.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#569 - 2014-02-18 04:10:55 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.

I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping.


Really? Because as far as I know, the gankers would just need to use 2-3 bumping frigs instead of one. Is your idea to "counter-gank" the bumping ships? I'm pretty sure everyone here could fit a 100MN MWD Tengu to actually have more EHP then the freighter it's bumping. Good like killing that with "4-6" destroyers.

Sure its possible, but the tengu takes some time to make it to speed and you have 6 destroyers that can bump the tengu.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
DSpite Culhach
#570 - 2014-02-18 04:13:55 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:


running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...

Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.


I would not personally say that it's an exploit as such. The problem exists mostly because the space being hisec, you are unable to open fire first on what is obviously an aggressive attack on your fleet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagement

Ability to do that would be nice, unfortunately I probably imagine it would be a coding nightmare, open to new exploit from clever players, and ultimately cause more problems.

On a side note: Why don't toons that destroy ships in hisec - at least more then once - just get flagged as hostile permanently? It's because CCP wants them to have this "ganker" playstyle, and I just don't think that CCP knows where exactly they should draw the line in the sand, so they just stand back and only intervene when they have a strong majority on one side, like say 75%. When we get this here at not even 50-50, they just sit back and say "they'll get over it".

I can't really blame them.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#571 - 2014-02-18 04:19:17 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:


running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...

Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.



I see no Problem in 12 Talos and 2 Nado being able to gank an orca.


I see no problem in your 'defense' failing.

What I see a problem with is you choosing to use Mach's as your webbers. Lol. Rapiers do get web range bonuses, as do Loki's. A single Sebo + 3 Web Loki woulda saved this orca without question.


Your failure to properly execute a defense does not mean exploit. It means you should learn to Eve.




Dspite wrote:
Also, I think you fill find that in Rock-Paper-Scissor, both sides go at the same time. With a Freighter, you already know I'm going to play Rock and you always show up and counter with paper. Give freighter modules and we can discuss this point again.



So if you know your enemy knows you're going to bring Rock and they will bring paper.... why do you still bring Rock?


Dspite wrote:
I would not personally say that it's an exploit as such. The problem exists mostly because the space being hisec, you are unable to open fire first on what is obviously an aggressive attack on your fleet.



There are no Eve mechanics that stop you from opening fire on another ship. There are consequences for choosing to, or choosing not to.


Dspite wrote:
On a side note: Why don't toons that destroy ships in hisec - at least more then once - just get flagged as hostile permanently? It's because CCP wants them to have this "ganker" playstyle, and I just don't think that CCP knows where exactly they should draw the line in the sand, so they just stand back and only intervene when they have a strong majority on one side, like say 75%. When we get this here at not even 50-50, they just sit back and say "they'll get over it".


I guess Sec Status, kill rights, and war dec's aren't a thing. And I would think CCP's stated opinion on the matter is 'Welcome to the Sandbox, it's not for everyone, Eve is a PVP game.'



This thread..... Roll

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#572 - 2014-02-18 05:34:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldiiee
Kenrailae wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:


running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts.
solo freighter>escorted freighter

bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter
gankers>solo freighters

escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps
escorted freighter>gankers

show me where the game design has failed here?

lol, in before ISD Izual...

Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.



I see no Problem in 12 Talos and 2 Nado being able to gank an orca.


I see no problem in your 'defense' failing.

What I see a problem with is you choosing to use Mach's as your webbers. Lol. Rapiers do get web range bonuses, as do Loki's. A single Sebo + 3 Web Loki woulda saved this orca without question.


Your failure to properly execute a defense does not mean exploit. It means you should learn to Eve.
Roll

Try something other than the 'No True Scotsman' defence.

No I agree, 14 Tier 3 BC's should be able to gank pretty much anything they want. But two or three 'immune from aggression' bumping ships should not be able to hold the target till it is convenient for that group to arrive. This is supposed to be a PVP game, does that really sound like PVP or just mechanics manipulation. I would have been ok with the gank if they had 20 scramming noob ships and kept cycling the scam as each one gets Concorded, but an immune aggressor is abusing a mechanic to the point of Exploit.

And yes, we should have brought long webs. the only jump that both webbing ships were out of range on spawn was conveniently (Or inconveniently) the one we lost it at.

The Orca pilot was a good sport and didn't rage too much, but having to sit in a ship unable to do anything but wait to get ganked in High Sec is poor mechanics.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#573 - 2014-02-18 05:39:38 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
I see no Problem in 12 Talos and 2 Nado being able to gank an orca.


I see no problem in your 'defense' failing.

What I see a problem with is you choosing to use Mach's as your webbers. Lol. Rapiers do get web range bonuses, as do Loki's. A single Sebo + 3 Web Loki woulda saved this orca without question.


Your failure to properly execute a defense does not mean exploit. It means you should learn to Eve.
Roll
Try something other than the 'No True Scotsman' defence.

No I agree, 14 Tier 3 BC's should be able to gank pretty much anything they want. But two or three immune from aggression bumping ships should not be able to hold the target till it is convenient for that group to arrive. This is supposed to be a PVP game, does that really sound like PVP or just mechanics manipulation. I would have been ok with the gank if they had 20 scramming noob ships and kept cycling the scam as each one gets Concorded, but an immune aggressor is abusing a mechanic to the point of Exploit.

And yes, we should have brought long webs. the only jump that both webbing ships were out of range on spawn was conveniently (Or inconveniently) the one we lost it at.

The Orca pilot was a good sport and didn't rage too much, but having to sit in a ship unable to do anything but wait to get ganked in High Sec is poor mechanics.



There might be a reason they use that gate..... Regional gates being huge and all for breaking groups up on jump in.

Out of curiosity, what gate was this?



And to me, it sounds like PVP.

Play Chess?

You don't start the game by taking pieces on your first move. You start the game by establishing board control and setting up trades. Nothing 'aggressive' should happen until those two things are established. Similar situation. The Bumper is establishing board control.

Every True Scotsman knows this.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#574 - 2014-02-18 05:54:33 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:


Play Chess?

You don't start the game by taking pieces on your first move. You start the game by establishing board control and setting up trades. Nothing 'aggressive' should happen until those two things are established. Similar situation. The Bumper is establishing board control.

Every True Scotsman knows this.

Actually I do play quite a bit of Chess, having all my opponents pieces on the board allows for a strategy, and all pieces are subject to attack while setting up the board, and there is no evil god that shows up an punishes me for setting up my opponent, I love my Chess games. EVE is not Chess, it's more like chutes and ladders with a team of screaming, cheating 7 year old.

If you wish to establish board control in High Sec then you should (Just like in chess) be subject to attack.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#575 - 2014-02-18 06:00:19 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:


Play Chess?

You don't start the game by taking pieces on your first move. You start the game by establishing board control and setting up trades. Nothing 'aggressive' should happen until those two things are established. Similar situation. The Bumper is establishing board control.

Every True Scotsman knows this.

Actually I do play quite a bit of Chess, having all my opponents pieces on the board allows for a strategy, and all pieces are subject to attack while setting up the board, and there is no evil god that shows up an punishes me for setting up my opponent, I love my Chess games. EVE is not Chess, it's more like chutes and ladders with a team of screaming, cheating 7 year old.

If you wish to establish board control in High Sec then you should (Just like in chess) be subject to attack.




I don't care who you are. It takes at least 3 moves to attack a rook that hasn't been thrown out in a stupid fashion. That's Unless someone moves A or H pawns out then throws the Rook out with reckless abandon, there are no other ways to get to that rook in less than 3 moves.

Similar to how it takes at least 3 moves to set up a freighter gank: Scout it, tackle it, gank it.

And Lady Luck is about as Evil a God as they get ;)



The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
DSpite Culhach
#576 - 2014-02-18 06:01:46 UTC  |  Edited by: DSpite Culhach
Kenrailae wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
I see no Problem in 12 Talos and 2 Nado being able to gank an orca.


I see no problem in your 'defense' failing.

What I see a problem with is you choosing to use Mach's as your webbers. Lol. Rapiers do get web range bonuses, as do Loki's. A single Sebo + 3 Web Loki woulda saved this orca without question.


Your failure to properly execute a defense does not mean exploit. It means you should learn to Eve.
Roll
Try something other than the 'No True Scotsman' defence.

No I agree, 14 Tier 3 BC's should be able to gank pretty much anything they want. But two or three immune from aggression bumping ships should not be able to hold the target till it is convenient for that group to arrive. This is supposed to be a PVP game, does that really sound like PVP or just mechanics manipulation. I would have been ok with the gank if they had 20 scramming noob ships and kept cycling the scam as each one gets Concorded, but an immune aggressor is abusing a mechanic to the point of Exploit.

And yes, we should have brought long webs. the only jump that both webbing ships were out of range on spawn was conveniently (Or inconveniently) the one we lost it at.

The Orca pilot was a good sport and didn't rage too much, but having to sit in a ship unable to do anything but wait to get ganked in High Sec is poor mechanics.



There might be a reason they use that gate..... Regional gates being huge and all for breaking groups up on jump in.

Out of curiosity, what gate was this?



And to me, it sounds like PVP.

Play Chess?

You don't start the game by taking pieces on your first move. You start the game by establishing board control and setting up trades. Nothing 'aggressive' should happen until those two things are established. Similar situation. The Bumper is establishing board control.

Every True Scotsman knows this.


I'm sorry but it just keeps on feeling like you are twisting everything. If we have to go into Chess comparisons:

I can still pull a draw from a game of chess where I only have a King and my opponent has most of the pieces left, by finding a way to position my King in a spot where, on my turn, I cannot longer move without putting myself in check. On your board, a naked King is ALWAYS a lost game.

You are also proposing having a chess board where the first person that moves has a better then 90% chance of winning a game - considering also that they seem to have the ability to bring more pieces on the board without risk - while in Chess, the "first move advantage" has been calculated at around 54%.

This is interesting talk and all, but it does not address the fact that (bumping) is a stupid mechanic.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
DSpite Culhach
#577 - 2014-02-18 06:09:48 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:


Play Chess?

You don't start the game by taking pieces on your first move. You start the game by establishing board control and setting up trades. Nothing 'aggressive' should happen until those two things are established. Similar situation. The Bumper is establishing board control.

Every True Scotsman knows this.

Actually I do play quite a bit of Chess, having all my opponents pieces on the board allows for a strategy, and all pieces are subject to attack while setting up the board, and there is no evil god that shows up an punishes me for setting up my opponent, I love my Chess games. EVE is not Chess, it's more like chutes and ladders with a team of screaming, cheating 7 year old.

If you wish to establish board control in High Sec then you should (Just like in chess) be subject to attack.




I don't care who you are. It takes at least 3 moves to attack a rook that hasn't been thrown out in a stupid fashion. That's Unless someone moves A or H pawns out then throws the Rook out with reckless abandon, there are no other ways to get to that rook in less than 3 moves.

Similar to how it takes at least 3 moves to set up a freighter gank: Scout it, tackle it, gank it.

And Lady Luck is about as Evil a God as they get ;)


I think you mean:

* sit on a gate
* bump any freighter that comes through, then scan it
* call your mates on the phone, and wait 20 minutes while they wake up and fly there
* give them 10 more minutes to organize and then simultaneously hit the F1 key

Not exactly speed chess.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#578 - 2014-02-18 06:12:56 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
I'm sorry but it just keeps on feeling like you are twisting everything. If we have to go into Chess comparisons:

I can still pull a draw from a game of chess where I only have a King and my opponent has most of the pieces left, by finding a way to position my King in a spot where, on my turn, I cannot longer move without putting myself in check. On your board, a naked King is ALWAYS a lost game.

You are also proposing having a chess board where the first person that moves has a better then 90% chance of winning a game - considering also that they seem to have the ability to bring more pieces on the board without risk - while in Chess, the "first move advantage" has been calculated at around 54%.

This is interesting talk and all, but it does not address the fact that it's a stupid mechanic.



Me twisting? You're the one throwing irrelevant numbers into this.


On my board, the Naked King does not always lose. Ganks fail all the time. People get out of desperate situations in Eve all the time. I should have lost a Moros the other day. It was pretty much dead to rights. But a decision a couple minutes before that, given shifting battle conditions and strategy, allowed me to live, and then took a Moros kill 5 minutes later because I forgot to refit to damage(This moros was in like.... 5% hull or less when it dragged its bloody, broken hull back across the POS shield). People make mistakes, allowing the Naked King to get away all the time.


But where you're clouding the discussion is here: The prepared, the ones thinking ahead with a plan, the ones who know what they are doing and planning for failures in their plan and compensating for them, and ready to adapt and adjust to their enemy, SHOULD kill the naked King nearly every time.


You're also confusing who makes the first move: The Freighter pilot does by undocking. The Gank force is a reaction to the action of flying a freighter.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
ISD Flidais Asagiri
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#579 - 2014-02-18 06:31:59 UTC
Amazing how we can turn an idea into a he said - she said rant. I am pretty sure the intention of the OP was that freighters need slots in order to counter a game mechanic, not the usual spiral into rants and irrelevant posts.


Thread is being locked for ranting and off topic posts.

ISD Flidais Asagiri Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department