Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So don't. Use the tools available to you. Do it right and sheer bad luck is the only thing that will stop you from avoiding the bumpage.

The only conclusion I can draw based on your refusal to discuss the actual merits of the current bump mechanic implementation is that you cannot defend the current implementation.

Given that you're an admitted freighter ganker, it's not too difficult to figure out why you want it to stay in the game anways.

It doesnt matter!

If you log off before they give you aggression timer, you disappear in 60 seconds regardless of what they do to you after you log off.

Targeting and bumping do not give you aggression timers so it doesnt matter what the "safe logoff" mechanic does, you can disconnect and be safe no problem.

The OP simply wants an easy fix to lone transport risk. I know this because of what he's already stated:




So he doesn't want to use escort friends, even though he is aware of the benefit. But we should defend the bumping tactic and it's use?
Bearing in mind the gankers do use friends and this is an MMO.

Seeing as how this has already been looked at, debated and ruled upon, why should we give a reasoned defence? It already exists as a ruling and thread in C&P.

It's not as if you don't already have options, it's not as if there are not counters already available. it's simply that OP is yet another one of those types of players, asking for hand holding mechanics. And for what? To bypass long established tactics, because of :EFFORT:

So let me get this straight, right now you can keep me from warping indefinitely, and if I shoot you for it, Concord will label me the aggressor and kill me.

And I'm the one that likes having my hand held?



Have you even read this thread?

The only change being proposed here is that the bumpers get a suspect flag for bumping and lose their Concord protection. That offers NO benefit to a solo freighter, since they can't shoot regardless.

I have no issue with bumping per se; the issue is with the current implementation which provides Concord protection for bumpers.

Bumping a freighter out of warp alignment is a hostile act--certainly as hostile as digging into my jetcan. It's completely reasonable that it be flagged as such.

Stop offering up bullshit.

Neither the OP or myself is suggesting that escorts are not an important part of logistics.
Neither the OP or myself is trying to nerf the way bumping works against warp.

All we're asking for is a suspect flag. If you can't handle a suspect flag for helping gank me, you need to STFU about freighter pilots wanting their hands held.

There are ways to counter being bumped. Do a ship scan of the bumping machariel next time you see one. You'll notice that it has virtually no tank (prove me wrong and show your fits). You see one bumping a freighter, get friends and gank the machariel, see another machariel? Kill that one too. Bump fit machariels go at least 650M ISK a pop, the few catalysts to kill them are worth pennies. Typhoons and stabbers die even easier. How long do their wallets hold such losses?

There's your counter and ton of giggles in the progress, maybe even tears.

Why not just add a low slot module that only capital industry ships can fit to make them bump resistant? Call it an "inertial dampener" or something. This gives players the option to be much harder to bump, instead of using the slot for a bonus to cargo, align time, hp, etc. No concord needed, no change to other ships that are much more capable of countering bump tactics.

See how I made an alternative suggestion there instead of just calling the OP stupid and spouting absurdities like "You should pay for 2 accounts to deal with this method of griefing." Weird right?

I agree that something is wrong with the current mechanics when it comes to the ship to ship energy transfer, aka. bumping, why you ask? well it is best explained with an example:

Lets say that player A is flying his freigher and has just jumped into the system where player B is waiting in his Machariel accompanied by his friends, who is ready to gank player A. Player B starts to accelerate using his MWD towards player A, who (for this example) does not appear to be moving.

Player B's kinetic energy can be calculated as (0.5 x 144,680k x 1780^2)x0.9 = E_k = ~206.3GJ, during the energy transfer there is an expected energy drop ( the 0.9 in equation equals a 10% loss of energy), if the E_k is put into this equation (for the Freighter): 206,300,000,000.0 = 450,000,000 x X^2, solving this equation results in X = 21.4m/s. Although the Machariel was moving at very high velocity than the freighter was, due to the much greater mass of the freighter, the bump would only move the freighter very slightly. Or atleast that is how it should be but that is not how the mechanics currently is.


Try imagine this: a car going at high velocity is hitting a big ferry, how much do you think it would move as a result of the impact? very little if at all.


To get an exact picture of what the actual ship to ship energy transfer of the game is will require a lot of testing.

To be fair, they've said that about a bunch of things they have later went on to alter.


My opinion is a bump should require a lock (thus stopping 4-4 undock being a train wreck) and give a suspect flag if there is not already a limited engagement. Hobo-point use remains intact, some risk attached to bumping ensues.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, there is no risk to bumping. Eve is all about risk, I should not be able to ransom people by means of bumping when they have no recourse which is appropriate to the level of risk I am accepting (which is zero).

Bumping as a mechanic is fine, people taking on zero risk for it.....that's right up there with the old neutral RR imo.

"Stop complaining about the broken speakers on your phone and use your headset."