These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

GM Response On Bumping

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#641 - 2015-01-08 22:28:48 UTC
Scott Bacon wrote:
Solonius Rex wrote:
Scott Bacon wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Scott Bacon wrote:
I've suggested this in game a few times when the conversation comes up, but I've never mentioned it in the forums, so I'll add my suggestion here.

Add a new equipment type that makes it easier for a ship to align for warp. It doesn't have to work on everything, it could be limited to just reducing the effect of a bump. Call it an Alignment Stabilizer. There could also be a Remote Alignment Stabilizer. Effects would stack.

The Alignment Stabilizer would be an active module that the pilot would have to turn on. This would prevent an AFK pilot from benefiting from it.

To avoid making the Remote Alignment Stabilizer overpowered, it's effect could be less than an Alignment Stabilizer and/or it's effect could be a suspect level offense, adding risk to using it if not in fleet with the target.

This seems like a good solution to the potential for overuse and abuse of bumping. It's an opt-in solution (requires fitting equipment) that provides a counter to bumping without completely destroying the ability to bump as a tactic.


Here is your "Alignment Stabilizer":
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ship_Equipment:Propulsion_:Propulsion_Upgrades:Inertia_Stabilizers

And here is your "Remote Alignment Stabilizer":
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ship_Equipment:Electronic_Warfare:Stasis_Webifiers

What makes you think your idea will actually change something? Especially since the suggested modules already exist. This just shows how bad the AG community is at the game. They even ask for tools they already have.


I think you know as well as I do that those modules you mention will be generally ineffective against bumping. I'm talking about a new type of module that specifically counters collision effects. Far narrower applicability than the modules you mention but more effective at their intended purpose. It would provide a viable defense against bumping without eliminating the ability to use bumping as a tactic because haulers would have to choose to use the modules and would have to be at their keyboard to activate them.

But the method you mention, is exactly the same as what an intertia stabilizer does. It allows you to align faster.

What exactly are you looking for? A module that allows for a capital ship to align instantly or something? Because that would defeat the whole purpose of having a large capital ship, and would be quite exploitable in low/null sec. If you want something that quickly aligns, buy a frigate. If you want a lumbering behemoth that has its drawbacks as well as its positive aspects, buy an obelisk. Its the price you pay for having a ship that can carry up to 800k+ m3 in stuff.

Also, isnt the Higgs anchor rig supposed to help counter against bumping?


A slight distinction here -- what I suggested would not allow a pilot to align faster in general, it would just reduce the de-aligning effects of collisions.

I appreciate you mentioning the Higgs Anchor. It's actually close to what I am talking about, though I have never experimented with one to see how effective it is. What I don't like about the Higgs Anchor is that it's a rig and cannot be equipped on freighters.


Ah, okay, i get it now.

That item seems a little too niche, though, so i doubt it will make it into the game. it would be like adding a module that reduces damage from Void charges, and void charges only.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#642 - 2015-01-09 00:56:07 UTC
Scott Bacon wrote:

I appreciate you mentioning the Higgs Anchor. It's actually close to what I am talking about, though I have never experimented with one to see how effective it is. What I don't like about the Higgs Anchor is that it's a rig and cannot be equipped on freighters.


It still baffles me that people fail to realize that freighters intentionally have weaknesses. Or that they might once have had rigs, but QQ put an end to that right quick.

"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.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#643 - 2015-01-09 08:36:20 UTC
This is a new idea I thought up on how to make bumpers go suspect without messing with the rest of the game.

You can right-click a player and flag him as a bumper. If he bumps your ship 3 more times after that, he turns suspect.

Restrictions:
-Only works when your ship speed is set to zero, so you cannot flag someone and bump them to suspect them
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero from being bumped
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero but your warp drive is active
-Does not work against players with active warp drives
-Does not work against players with a legal engagement such as war targets or duels
-Setting your ship speed positive or disengaging your warp drive resets the flag
-You can only flag someone for bumping you when you're in a vulnerable classed vessel. Freighters and Orcas are the only ships in this class.

The Jita undock would be nuts!
Unlike other bumping suspect ideas, this has no such consequence. A ship coasting out of the undock has not manually set their ship speed and cannot be flagged for this. A ship aligning out for warp cannot be flagged for this. A ship sitting at zero on the undock cannot be flagged for this. A ship moving on the undock cannot be baited into this as you cannot be manually moving yourself to flag him.

Why should you be able to turn someone suspect for bumping you?
What they are doing is similar to using a warp disrupter on you. They are engaging you in PVP combat. You should be able to shoot back. Engaging players in PVP combat in high-sec without a legal flag usually has the consequence of going criminal. Going suspect is a fair compromise.

Bumping is legit gameplay, this would make it too risky.
If you think that you are risk-averse. Grow a pair, fit some guns on your bump ship, and get some friends in logi to keep you repped.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#644 - 2015-01-09 17:29:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima Wreckyou
Steppa Musana wrote:
Does not work against players with active warp drives

Nice idea! I will just activate the warp drive before I hit the target.

The problem with all "solutions" that end with someone becoming suspect is that it is never only bumper vs. miner/hauler. It's "Player with interest in the game mechanics" vs. "Player who plays EVE like a singleplayer game". This would result in epic tears as we would probably find ways around this very quickly (like I just demonstrated, and yes go on adjust the rules again) and get a new way to trick some counter-bumper into going suspect because they don't know about your rather unintuitive new game mechanic.

Evil RatKid
Colette Kassia
Kassia Industrial Supply
#645 - 2015-01-09 19:03:36 UTC
Steppa Musana wrote:
This is a new idea I thought up on how to make bumpers go suspect without messing with the rest of the game.

You can right-click a player and flag him as a bumper. If he bumps your ship 3 more times after that, he turns suspect.

Restrictions:
-Only works when your ship speed is set to zero, so you cannot flag someone and bump them to suspect them
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero from being bumped
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero but your warp drive is active
-Does not work against players with active warp drives
-Does not work against players with a legal engagement such as war targets or duels
-Setting your ship speed positive or disengaging your warp drive resets the flag
-You can only flag someone for bumping you when you're in a vulnerable classed vessel. Freighters and Orcas are the only ships in this class.

The Jita undock would be nuts!
Unlike other bumping suspect ideas, this has no such consequence. A ship coasting out of the undock has not manually set their ship speed and cannot be flagged for this. A ship aligning out for warp cannot be flagged for this. A ship sitting at zero on the undock cannot be flagged for this. A ship moving on the undock cannot be baited into this as you cannot be manually moving yourself to flag him.

Why should you be able to turn someone suspect for bumping you?
What they are doing is similar to using a warp disrupter on you. They are engaging you in PVP combat. You should be able to shoot back. Engaging players in PVP combat in high-sec without a legal flag usually has the consequence of going criminal. Going suspect is a fair compromise.

Bumping is legit gameplay, this would make it too risky.
If you think that you are risk-averse. Grow a pair, fit some guns on your bump ship, and get some friends in logi to keep you repped.



Your threadnought got MODERATOROKKENED too? Welcome to the club.
Here was my suggestion.
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#646 - 2015-01-09 19:27:30 UTC
Steppa Musana wrote:
This is a new idea I thought up on how to make bumpers go suspect without messing with the rest of the game.

You can right-click a player and flag him as a bumper. If he bumps your ship 3 more times after that, he turns suspect.

Restrictions:
-Only works when your ship speed is set to zero, so you cannot flag someone and bump them to suspect them
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero from being bumped
-Does work if your ship speed is above zero but your warp drive is active
-Does not work against players with active warp drives
-Does not work against players with a legal engagement such as war targets or duels
-Setting your ship speed positive or disengaging your warp drive resets the flag
-You can only flag someone for bumping you when you're in a vulnerable classed vessel. Freighters and Orcas are the only ships in this class.

The Jita undock would be nuts!
Unlike other bumping suspect ideas, this has no such consequence. A ship coasting out of the undock has not manually set their ship speed and cannot be flagged for this. A ship aligning out for warp cannot be flagged for this. A ship sitting at zero on the undock cannot be flagged for this. A ship moving on the undock cannot be baited into this as you cannot be manually moving yourself to flag him.

Why should you be able to turn someone suspect for bumping you?
What they are doing is similar to using a warp disrupter on you. They are engaging you in PVP combat. You should be able to shoot back. Engaging players in PVP combat in high-sec without a legal flag usually has the consequence of going criminal. Going suspect is a fair compromise.

Bumping is legit gameplay, this would make it too risky.
If you think that you are risk-averse. Grow a pair, fit some guns on your bump ship, and get some friends in logi to keep you repped.


Wait, but what if you set your ship speed to maximum, and then set it back to zero? your ship would carry the momentum and slowly decrease to zero, but you would still be able to bump the ship despite the fact that your ship speed is set to zero.

Furthermore, what about autopiloting ships? they intentionally set their speed to maximum. I could sit 10k off the gate and stand between an autopilot ship and the gate, and have the ship bump me and activate the suspect flag.

Also, what the hell is a "Vulnerable classed vessel"? I dont think such a category exists in eve. Im not even sure why orcas would belong in that class, as orcas have low, mid and highslots, rigslots and drone bays.

I dont even see why this is combat. But all in all, this seems to be something that is completely and easily avoidable by having 2 ships bump twice each, and then initiating gank. Gankers arent stingy on numbers, after all. This doesnt seem like a mechanic that would change anything, despite the utter pain in the ass it would take for the devs to impliment such a convoluted system.
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#647 - 2015-01-09 19:41:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Solonius Rex
Colette Kassia wrote:
I posted this in the Suggestion section. It seemed that a suggested change to the regular Warp Drive belonged in its own thread, rather than at the end of 32 pages of degenerate bickering. But the moderator disagreed and told be to put it here.

Collette Kassia wrote:

In another thread there was some discussion about abuse of the bumping mechanic to prevent warp, before it went off the rails and was locked. This guy wanted bumping to be a flaggable offence, while others rightfully pointed out all of the other problems that it would create.

I have a better idea: Lets make the normal warp drive behave the way that MicroJump drives do after a bump. If you get bumped off alignment after starting a warp then your warp drive still fires, but it sends you in whatever direction you are pointing at the moment your speed hit 75% (even, and especially, when the bump caused most of the acceleration). You land somewhere else. Some distance (however many AU your warp drive charged to) but in a totally different direction.

The implication of this are:
- No more getting you battleship bumplocked in highsec by some little brat in a frigate. Ditto for freighters. Makes you want to reach through the monitor and slap 'em. You have to do one extra warp, from where ever you landed back to where you want to go. But that's a lot better than getting held down for who-knows how long.
- CODE can still suicide-gank AFK freighters in highsec. Have it so that if the autopilot detects that if a jump landed more than 100km off course (almost surely) then it shuts down with the next-target-gate unselected (to disrupt auto-clicker function). That will give CODE plenty of time to find it with Combat Probes and resume their enforcement action. At-F***ing-Keyboard players will likely be able to escape. (And I'm sure CODE can still ambush freighters without any bumping, it will just require better fleet coordination and quicker response time. I don't think that CCP should totally quash highsec ganking; but I do think it should require more gamesmanship than a street mugging.)
- Normal "legit gameplay mechanic" bumping is unaffected. The main problem with bumping is its 'griefish' interference with warping. Nudging away an AFK miner, or any other miner with whom you are competing with for ore. is still allowed.
- It'd be kind funny. :) Imagine what this would do with the bumper-cars that is always happening outside Jita 4-4.
- And it could be employed to make better quality safespots.


This seemed like reasonable compromise between the two positions: those who wanted a Wrath-of-God CONCORD response to collisions and those who think everything's fine and has always been. But like any good compromise, it got flamed to a crisp and thread-locked within hours. But after reading these 32 pages of arguing. I'm am beginning to understand why I got so much hate so fast. People thought that this thread had metastasised...

And after dutifully reading through all of this crap, I concede that a targeted "fix" may not really be necessary. There were some ideas mentioned to escape a bumplock that I hadn't thought of. But I still insist that the game would be better if the regular Warp Drive worked more like a giant MicroJump module. If I had been on the dev team in the early 2000s, when EVE was being developed, this is how I would have designed it, even without foreseeing that "emergent gameplay mechanics". Just let physical interference during the build-up to a warp cause a navigational error that sends to ship off course.

There, everyone's happy.

And, as I mentioned in my original post, this will not totally quash legitimate high-sec PvP. I'm completely sure CODE is competent enough to pounce on a target instantly. They just won't be able to hold him down for five minutes while they get their sh!t together. It would "require more gamesmanship than a street mugging." Do you PvPers think this is unreasonable?!

And notice what I'm NOT saying. I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with bumping miners away from their cans. I'm not demanding that all asteroid belts be harassment-free workplaces. And I'm not saying that collisions should have any criminal or CONCORD implications. I just want to get rid of the 'hobo tackle' bullsh!t in the most nonintrusive and role-play-compatible why I can think of. And yes, it really is bullsh!t.



Although this is a stupidly complicated thing to impliment, it would ruin a lot of strategies for us in nullsec as well as cause major headache in highsec trade hubs. People frequently bump ships undocking in null/lowsec so that they are bumped outside of the docking range of the station, and therefore can be killed. People frequently use bumping as a mechanic in lieu of points/scrams and to combat stabs on ships. Hell, ive even seen interdiction nullified and warp core stabilized Tengus being bumped and killed before. All of these basic game mechanics would dissapear. You might as well be removing bumping as a whole, for the effect on gameplay would be the same.

You would necessarily be making warp-core stabbed ships, nearly invincible against smaller fleets. The drawbacks of flying a large ship like an industrial or freighter is that they align slowly, while providing large cargo space. Thats the whole point of bumping a 5 lowslot warpcore stabbed Iteron 5, so that, even if you cant point him, you can still easily kill him.
Sharise Dragonstar
Big Strong
Hisec Miners
#648 - 2015-01-10 13:54:48 UTC
The solution to bumping is so easy. Collision detection. Have ships damaged according to there size, whatever they are bumpings size and whatever speed they are doing when they get bumped. A frigate bumping a freighter at 2k a sec should nudge the freighter off line but should also destroy itself. If you want to test this theory...take a small road car, accelerate it to top speed and ram a HGV...let us know how you get on. (BTW that was a joke in case anyone stupid enough to try). Just deactivate collision detection at station entrances.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#649 - 2015-01-10 16:29:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Sharise Dragonstar wrote:
The solution to bumping is so easy. Collision detection. Have ships damaged according to there size, whatever they are bumpings size and whatever speed they are doing when they get bumped.
Bumpers and gankers would be ecstatic if this was the case, they'd just ram freighters with multiple ships at high speed until they exploded.

Quote:
A frigate bumping a freighter at 2k a sec should nudge the freighter off line but should also destroy itself. If you want to test this theory...take a small road car, accelerate it to top speed and ram a HGV...let us know how you get on. (BTW that was a joke in case anyone stupid enough to try). Just deactivate collision detection at station entrances.
In Eve that small car has a mass measured in hundreds of thousands of KG and is travelling at Mach 6+ (assuming Destroyer and 10MN MWD, frigates are not as effective for bumping).

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#650 - 2015-01-10 16:49:43 UTC
Sharise Dragonstar wrote:
The solution to bumping is so easy. Collision detection. Have ships damaged according to there size, whatever they are bumpings size and whatever speed they are doing when they get bumped. A frigate bumping a freighter at 2k a sec should nudge the freighter off line but should also destroy itself. If you want to test this theory...take a small road car, accelerate it to top speed and ram a HGV...let us know how you get on. (BTW that was a joke in case anyone stupid enough to try). Just deactivate collision detection at station entrances.


So frigates undocking in jita at maximum velocity and bumping into freighters should be slaughtered?
Black Pedro
Mine.
#651 - 2015-01-10 17:33:58 UTC
Solonius Rex wrote:
Sharise Dragonstar wrote:
The solution to bumping is so easy. Collision detection. Have ships damaged according to there size, whatever they are bumpings size and whatever speed they are doing when they get bumped. A frigate bumping a freighter at 2k a sec should nudge the freighter off line but should also destroy itself. If you want to test this theory...take a small road car, accelerate it to top speed and ram a HGV...let us know how you get on. (BTW that was a joke in case anyone stupid enough to try). Just deactivate collision detection at station entrances.


So frigates undocking in jita at maximum velocity and bumping into freighters should be slaughtered?

The solution is so easy!

The tears from missioners and other carebears who accidentally collide with an in-space structure or other ship by mistake while at full speed would be delicious. Not to mention the havoc a bumping Mach could cause hitting small ships head on to make them explode.

I would love this change.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Kairos Antilles
Doomheim
#652 - 2015-01-11 05:49:42 UTC
I just can't believe this discussion is still a 'thing'.
PastyWhiteDevil
Wilderness
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
#653 - 2015-01-16 20:54:04 UTC
Kimo Khan wrote:
You are missing my point. I know bumping is not a flaggable action in itself, but the scenario I mentioned is that it is combined with a flaggable action, just like Remote Repping is flagable only when you use it on a flagged person. So why would bumping when used with a criminal gank not be flaggable?

It is not a question to players, it is a question to CCP to consider. Bumping to prevent warp is a circumvention to the warp scram mechanic which flags a person. Edit: Removed the whole thing of not bumping during warp as I can see that abused as well.


what if you were to receive an intentionally distracting convo? should the sender get a glag?

"Bumping to prevent warp is a circumvention to the warp scram mechanic" that's almost like saying align time is a circumvention of the scram mechanic. bumping is just manipulating align time.

and if you are advocating that ships should not be "bumpable" once they initiate warp that is also a bad idea. it would be a buff to super caps which is not needed.
Argonicus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#654 - 2015-01-16 21:46:13 UTC
It maybe role bonuses for all indy and freighters, like reduced jump fatigue
Ebola IV
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#655 - 2015-01-18 15:31:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ebola IV
The solution is easy indeed: Just add a counter for bumping the same ship within a given time (like 5 minutes). After counter reaches 2 give a global warning to the bumper; After it hits 3 add a suspect flag to the bumper.

It wouldnt change null-sec, but would affect low- and hi-sec in a very positive way. The high-sec elite pvpers would either be in need for a new "easy-mode-perma-unpunished-warp-scrambler" or alternatively finally add some proper timing in order to get something ganked. I mean, theres already really some special amount of skill needed to be in time at the Uedama undock and initiate the 3-click-sequence: warp to the ganker-FCs safe spot, being fleetwarped to the victim, locking the broadcasted target and finally activating those guns while the bumper macro-bumps the victim all evening...

So the mentioned bump counter would add to the already huge skill-requirements, as the bumping would need some coordination too and the elite pvpers would be forced to break new ground by being forced to dive into the "risk-vs-reward"-philosophy for the first time and actually risk something valuable other than all those cadged Catalysts (or at least change the Machariel doctrine) P
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#656 - 2015-01-19 02:23:37 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:
The solution is easy indeed: Just add a counter for bumping the same ship within a given time (like 5 minutes). After counter reaches 2 give a global warning to the bumper; After it hits 3 add a suspect flag to the bumper.


I can think of a few ways off the top of my head to use such a mechanic in ways that you won't like.

Nevermind that it begs the question "why should the people who are afk be given protections of any kind?" (although your suggestion would, in fact, hurt them very badly by letting clever people flag literally any hauler they feel like without consequence)

"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
#657 - 2015-01-19 04:00:24 UTC
Solution to bumping is easy...after CONCORD spawns in response to a gank attempt on a ship...that ship can warp off for 60 seconds unaffected by bumping. No complex suspect mechanics, no unintended consequences...just a clean and easy solution.
Ebola IV
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#658 - 2015-01-19 09:24:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ebola IV
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ebola IV wrote:
The solution is easy indeed: Just add a counter for bumping the same ship within a given time (like 5 minutes). After counter reaches 2 give a global warning to the bumper; After it hits 3 add a suspect flag to the bumper.


I can think of a few ways off the top of my head to use such a mechanic in ways that you won't like.


Tell me more, I'm curious Roll

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nevermind that it begs the question "why should the people who are afk be given protections of any kind?" (although your suggestion would, in fact, hurt them very badly by letting clever people flag literally any hauler they feel like without consequence)


Well, of course my suggestion would need a proper implementation, so the system knows whos the bumper and whos the bumpee. And yes, even when Troll X decides to camp hi-sec gate while trying to cross someones alignment line to force them to be the bumper.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#659 - 2015-01-19 10:36:56 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:
Well, of course my suggestion would need a proper implementation, so the system knows whos the bumper and whos the bumpee. And yes, even when Troll X decides to camp hi-sec gate while trying to cross someones alignment line to force them to be the bumper.

This is the core of the problem. It is very difficult to come up with a set of rules to decide who is the bumper and who the bumpee. And if the system flags a "bumper" that means if players just figure out just one way to game the system, even if it has low probability of success, it will be eventually be used to gank other players without CONCORD intervention.

Freighters are large capital ships, and just like every other large capital ship since the beginning of this game they are vulnerable to bumping. If the bumping of ships in highsec ever gets out of control, the fix will come either from a module that needs to be added at a fitting cost (low-slot MJD?), or with a change to policy like "you can't bump a ship for more than an hour or it is harassment".

CCP intends for hauler ganking to be in the game - and bumping is pretty much the only way you can hold down such a large ship long enough to get enough gank ships to it. Plus, there are many uses of bumping in other parts of the game other than highsec ganking make it unlikely that CCP is ever going to change the core of the mechanic, and they certainly won't just to increase the safety of haulers in highsec who are already very, very safe.

Why do people insist on arguing for changes to the game solely for their own personal advantage on the forums? There are plenty of ways to avoid bumpers either by flying other ships, or bringing friends. Vulnerability to bumping is a (intended/emergent) weakness of freighters - just like everything else in this game there are tradeoffs. Use freighters when they are appropriate to haul your stuff, and use another ship or tactics when they are not.

You know, actually play the game?

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Tim Timpson
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#660 - 2015-01-20 11:25:53 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Freighters are large capital ships, and just like every other large capital ship since the beginning of this game they are vulnerable to bumping. If the bumping of ships in highsec ever gets out of control, the fix will come either from a module that needs to be added at a fitting cost (low-slot MJD?)
An alignment stabliser would be a good addition. Removes cargo space in order to make a freighter hold alignment better when bumped. As it also takes up a spot where bulkheads would go, using it would mean you can't be as tanked either.

Black Pedro wrote:
or with a change to policy like "you can't bump a ship for more than an hour or it is harassment".
I was under the impression this was already a rule. If you bumped someone for a significant amount of time without attempting to gank them I'm pretty sure if it was reported GMs would intervene and am certain I've read that somewhere written by a GM or dev. Like you said, CCP intends for hauler ganking to be in the game and bumping is a key part of that, but bumping for no reason other to bump and for a significant amount of time is just attempting to stop someone else playing, which is not part of that.