These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3641 - 2014-09-03 03:24:09 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
CODE has basically unlimited ISK already. Hopefully this thread has caused CCP to think about curbing the abuse of bumping and imposing grinding requirements on CODE
What abuse?
Why would CCP curb the use of legitimate game mechanics and impose bad gameplay on people for no apparent reason?
virgofire
Vay Mining Corporation
#3642 - 2014-09-03 03:24:23 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
virgofire wrote:
All in all the idea of high sec ganking is fine. My only wish would be that something be done a bit about bumping. No matter how good a pilot you are, once someone starts to bump you, you are kind of toast. Very few counters to it and most involve luck.

I think that would be the part that would frustrate me the most. Try as I might, I couldnt save my ship from being pushed off the gate.

Granted I know nothing will be done about bumping, since really nothing can be done. Just my wishful thinking.


I actually proposed a fix. If CONCORD spawns post gank attempt, you would get 60 seconds to warp off where you would be unaffected by bumping. This would not help you survive the initial gank attempt, but it would at least mean they would only get one shot at you.


Unfortunately I just see that as being too easy. 60 seconds is along time and a bit OP. I can understand the frustration of being ganked. I am a horrible PVPer, and I hate losing ships, especially expensive ones, however that is the game.

If anything would be done in my mind, it would be to fix how bumping works. Instead of a frigate completely re aligning a freighter when bumping it, the mass of the two ships should be more accurate. A freighter should have enough power in its engines to push a small frigate out of the way, and its mass should be able to compensate for moderate impacts. So a freighter should still be able to reach warp velocity even while being bumps, unless multiple ships are on it.

I realize this is kind of how the current mechanics are but the collision isnt horribly accurate.

Just a random though.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3643 - 2014-09-03 03:25:25 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

CODE has basically unlimited ISK already. Hopefully this thread has caused CCP to think about curbing the abuse of bumping and imposing grinding requirements on CODE, which would have far more affect on the operation than a bit more isk coming in so you guys can blow up empty ships.


I love how someone like you, who stridently demands "you can't force me to PvP", is perfectly fine with forcing people to PvE when they don't want to.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3644 - 2014-09-03 03:29:04 UTC
virgofire wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
virgofire wrote:
All in all the idea of high sec ganking is fine. My only wish would be that something be done a bit about bumping. No matter how good a pilot you are, once someone starts to bump you, you are kind of toast. Very few counters to it and most involve luck.

I think that would be the part that would frustrate me the most. Try as I might, I couldnt save my ship from being pushed off the gate.

Granted I know nothing will be done about bumping, since really nothing can be done. Just my wishful thinking.


I actually proposed a fix. If CONCORD spawns post gank attempt, you would get 60 seconds to warp off where you would be unaffected by bumping. This would not help you survive the initial gank attempt, but it would at least mean they would only get one shot at you.


Unfortunately I just see that as being too easy. 60 seconds is along time and a bit OP. I can understand the frustration of being ganked. I am a horrible PVPer, and I hate losing ships, especially expensive ones, however that is the game.

If anything would be done in my mind, it would be to fix how bumping works. Instead of a frigate completely re aligning a freighter when bumping it, the mass of the two ships should be more accurate. A freighter should have enough power in its engines to push a small frigate out of the way, and its mass should be able to compensate for moderate impacts. So a freighter should still be able to reach warp velocity even while being bumps, unless multiple ships are on it.

I realize this is kind of how the current mechanics are but the collision isnt horribly accurate.

Just a random though.



CCP is rather unlikely to radically overhaul its physics engine anytime soon.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3645 - 2014-09-03 03:29:28 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Veers Belvar wrote:
CODE has basically unlimited ISK already. Hopefully this thread has caused CCP to think about curbing the abuse of bumping and imposing grinding requirements on CODE, which would have far more affect on the operation than a bit more isk coming in so you guys can blow up empty ships.


So you're saying that CCP should make it a policy to punish success.

Veers Belvar wrote:

CCP is rather unlikely to radically overhaul its physics engine anytime soon.


So why do you keep calling for exactly that?

Bye the bye, CCP has radically overhauled its physics engine at least once since bumping gained popularity as a tactic.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Doomheim
#3646 - 2014-09-03 03:30:01 UTC  |  Edited by: NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Tippia wrote:

Quote:
I actually proposed a fix.
To what? You haven't defined any kind of problem with the game.


Just because you are incapable or unwilling to understanding the problem, does not mean a problem does not exist.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3647 - 2014-09-03 03:30:41 UTC
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Tippia wrote:

Quote:
I actually proposed a fix.
To what? You haven't defined any kind of problem with the game.


Just because you are incapable of understanding the problem, does not mean a problem does not exist.


Nor does repeating a lie mean that a problem does exist.

Especially when CCP themselves tell you that you are wrong.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3648 - 2014-09-03 03:31:36 UTC
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Just because you are incapable of understanding can't read minds and have never been told the problem, does not mean a problem does not exist.

So define it. Explicitly. Using actual facts to prove that it is a problem.
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Doomheim
#3649 - 2014-09-03 03:32:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Just because you are incapable of understanding can't read minds and have never been told the problem, does not mean a problem does not exist.

So define it. Explicitly. Using actual facts to prove that it is a problem.


People have done that multiple times already. Scroll back and read the thread since you don't seem to understand what it is about.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3650 - 2014-09-03 03:38:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
People have done that multiple times already.

I repeat: “Using actual facts to prove it is a problem”.

No. No-one has been able to define an actual problem.

They have just been able to air unfounded concerns and complained about things that do not — can not — actually exist in the game; things they've heard about from someone who completely misunderstood what was going on to begin with. All of those claims have been proven false or proven unsupported or just outright demolished because the logic behind them was thoroughly fallacious.

You weren't even able to suggest one right now, when told outright to do so. That's how non-existant the problem is: the one person who desperately needs one to exist to validate his constant barrage of abuse and foot-stomping fails completely at even suggesting that there is one.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3651 - 2014-09-03 03:40:32 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
CODE has basically unlimited ISK already. Hopefully this thread has caused CCP to think about curbing the abuse of bumping and imposing grinding requirements on CODE
What abuse?
Why would CCP curb the use of legitimate game mechanics and impose bad gameplay on people for no apparent reason?


Because its being used to replicate the effect of warp scrambling.

And imposing grinding requirements will curb the ganking of empty ships just to annoy people.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3652 - 2014-09-03 03:41:51 UTC
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Tippia wrote:
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Just because you are incapable of understanding can't read minds and have never been told the problem, does not mean a problem does not exist.

So define it. Explicitly. Using actual facts to prove that it is a problem.


People have done that multiple times already. Scroll back and read the thread since you don't seem to understand what it is about.


People have provided facts.
Bumping is working as intended:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=199310

CCP is not going to be protecting your hauler for you:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4958992#post4958992

EVE Devs are invested in continuing to produce a game that is actually dark, gritty, and hard:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4964192#post4964192

And PVP is to be expected anywhere in EVE:
http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/communityassets/pdf/EVE-Online-New-Pilot-FAQ.pdf

So, how does this add up to there being a problem?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3653 - 2014-09-03 03:42:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Veers Belvar wrote:
Because its being used to replicate the effect of warp scrambling.
No. Stop lying.

Quote:
And imposing grinding requirements will curb the ganking of empty ships just to annoy people.
Can you prove that anything of the kind is happening? And why is such an imposition of bad gameplay needed?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3654 - 2014-09-03 03:45:24 UTC
virgofire wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
virgofire wrote:
All in all the idea of high sec ganking is fine. My only wish would be that something be done a bit about bumping. No matter how good a pilot you are, once someone starts to bump you, you are kind of toast. Very few counters to it and most involve luck.

I think that would be the part that would frustrate me the most. Try as I might, I couldnt save my ship from being pushed off the gate.

Granted I know nothing will be done about bumping, since really nothing can be done. Just my wishful thinking.


I actually proposed a fix. If CONCORD spawns post gank attempt, you would get 60 seconds to warp off where you would be unaffected by bumping. This would not help you survive the initial gank attempt, but it would at least mean they would only get one shot at you.


Unfortunately I just see that as being too easy. 60 seconds is along time and a bit OP. I can understand the frustration of being ganked. I am a horrible PVPer, and I hate losing ships, especially expensive ones, however that is the game.

If anything would be done in my mind, it would be to fix how bumping works. Instead of a frigate completely re aligning a freighter when bumping it, the mass of the two ships should be more accurate. A freighter should have enough power in its engines to push a small frigate out of the way, and its mass should be able to compensate for moderate impacts. So a freighter should still be able to reach warp velocity even while being bumps, unless multiple ships are on it.

I realize this is kind of how the current mechanics are but the collision isnt horribly accurate.

Just a random though.



A frigate isn't going to do much when i slams into a freighter. People use machs, the bulkiest fast fat thing in game, to do the bumping.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3655 - 2014-09-03 03:46:01 UTC
I still want to hear about how it's not okay to force people to PvP, but how it's just fine to try and force people to PvE.

Care to answer that, either of you two hypocrites?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3656 - 2014-09-03 03:46:35 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


Because its being used to replicate the effect of warp scrambling.



I have already told you why freighters are bumped once in this thread and it is not to replicate a warp scram.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3657 - 2014-09-03 03:48:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


Because its being used to replicate the effect of warp scrambling.



I have already told you why freighters are bumped once in this thread and it is not to replicate a warp scram.


If it wasnt to replicate a warp scram they would just warp off and what would the point be?
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3658 - 2014-09-03 03:50:09 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I still want to hear about how it's not okay to force people to PvP, but how it's just fine to try and force people to PvE.

Care to answer that, either of you two hypocrites?


I think it's fine to force PvP, I support suicide ganking. I also happen to think that the police would not take kindly to career -10 sec status suicide gankers hanging out, and would force them out of the system. Hence why I think highsec should be off limits if your sec status goes too low. Grind it up and be more selective with your ganks.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3659 - 2014-09-03 03:51:56 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


If it wasnt to replicate a warp scram they would just warp off and what would the point be?


They can just warp off as their warp drive is still fully functional. All they need is something in front of their ship to warp to.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3660 - 2014-09-03 03:53:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


If it wasnt to replicate a warp scram they would just warp off and what would the point be?


They can just warp off as their warp drive is still fully functional. All they need is something in front of their ship to warp to.


Yes, and the Bumping is done so they CANNOT do that. The bumpers push them in a direction where there is nothing to warp to.