These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Countering Bumping ganks in highsec

First post
Author
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#161 - 2015-11-09 12:43:49 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
As said before no one in there right mind, would loot a yellow wreck in a freighter.


Killrights are rare to find on Freighter pilots as Freighter pilots don't go out getting Killrights. Normally you see only the ones that are scamming with them. Sometimes yes you do find some shiny ship with a KR. But normally it's something other than freighter. In all my days in Highsec. Which have been since I started playing. I have never once personally seen a Freighter with a legitimate KR on it.



All of that is high sec working as intended. It does not make it safe, it does mean you will get concorded if you violence that pilot. Or should, anyway.

He did what he is supposed to do to maintain concords protection.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#162 - 2015-11-10 20:38:01 UTC
Daret wrote:


Implement a new feature, Emergency Warp.

Emergency Warp starts a 30 second timer similar to when logging out in space (possibly with or without modules turned on) where you are then warped a random distance in a random direction (10-99 au?) Any aggressive action that would normally call concord cancels the warp.


So...this is implemented, and now the gank fleets just aggress with a noob ship to cancel the warp....kind of like what they do to keep a person in space if they logoff.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2015-11-10 20:52:34 UTC
just for fun, cos I'm still expecting a lock on this thread, heres a few more bumping ideas:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5590409#post5590409

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5560276#post5560276

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5386858#post5386858

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5386838#post5386838

With gems like those people should be happy I'm not writing up real ideas anymore.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#164 - 2015-11-10 23:06:05 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Or you just do what anyone with half a brain does, and web your freighter.



This is the easiest solution. It requires teamwork - another pilot in your corp (if friendly fire is turned off or you are in an NPC or in separate corps: flagging dueling between the webber and the freighter can be done) can use a web to nearly insta-warp the freighter.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#165 - 2015-11-10 23:33:09 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Mag's wrote:
3. Is CCP OK with it? Now this was a definite yes, but now I'm not so sure. Why? Well take a look at the first new line in the bumping thread.

CCP CiD wrote:
**This forum post is now 3 year old and does not represent CCP´s current stance on the issue, as such it can be viewed as outdated**


Well, well. Something interesting happened in this thread after all...Shocked


They won't be changing anything, jita undock forces their handBlink
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#166 - 2015-11-11 05:27:24 UTC
Unless they just let ships ghost through eachother.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#167 - 2015-11-11 05:41:17 UTC
You know what I find amusing about these threads? Three things. The first is that those who do the complaining have not, apparently considered the concept of an evolutionary arms race.

Quote:
...an evolutionary arms race is an evolutionary struggle between competing sets of co-evolving genes, traits, or species, that develop adaptations and counter-adaptations against each other, resembling an arms race, which could be, and often are, described as examples of positive feedback.


In this case, we have people whine incessantly to CCP about ganking, and insurance, and how it is all so unfair. CCP nerfs it, and those doing the ganking respond by adapting and getting even better and finding a new method (a large number of ultra cheap high DPS ships along with bumping).

So, the people getting ganked come back and demand that somebody else (CCP) take care of the problem the last nerf was supposed to fix. In short, these people put on a pathetic display of entitlement and self-righteousness while stamping their feet about how they are right and everyone else is wrong...all the while doing, literally, nothing to solve their problems themselves.

We have in one corner the gankers who are:

1. Organized,
2. Well versed in game mechanics,
3. Spending time/effiort setting things up to do ganks.

In the other corner we have the "victims" who:

1. Refuse to organize themselves.
2. Refuse to learn game mechanics.
3. Do not want to spend anything but minimal time/effort to accomplish their goals.

The latter corner also always runs to CCP saying that just one more nerf! Just one more! Give us this one more thing and it will be balanced....until somebody figures out how to gank a ship with the new rule change in which case the crowd of entitled and self-righteous come asking for yet another nerf. For this latter group their standard cant is, the game is not balanced until you implement my preferred nerf...then it will be balanced...until I come asking for yet another nerf...and yet another and another.

And the really amusing thing....these players do not need to be as organized as CODE. and the like. They just need a scout, maybe a webbing alt, and that is about it. If they wanted to be pro-active 10 guys in catalysts would melt your typical bumping machariel. A machariel hull costs about 5x that of 10 catalysts. These players can put billions in a freighter but can't spare a few million for a few catalysts? Really?

You guys deserve everything you get at the hands of players in game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#168 - 2015-11-11 05:45:31 UTC
Daret wrote:


Your definition of 'playing the game' is clearly not the same as mine. Maybe you have 0 respect for miners and industry but they're a vital part of EVE and so are definitely playing the game.

As for watching local, we're talking highsec here, you try keeping track of the 20+ names that appear and dissapear on the local list every few minutes.

And again.. afk players are not affected by this measure. If someone is truly afk then you don't need to bump them to kill them



I love this....

We are industrialists, we build your ships which we sell to you for a profit so you should be extra nice to us. Talk about a perverse from of special pleading.

Here is a hint for watching local in HS...use your watch list. Set ganking alliances, corporations, etc. red and that way you can see them with greater ease.

You need to bump AFK freighters that are using autopilot.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Tyranex Obsoletus
Dark Saints
#169 - 2015-11-11 11:54:55 UTC
Tappits wrote:
Daret wrote:
I realize that CPP has stated that bumping is a game mechanic and is probably never going to be changed. But that doesn't stop someone from bumping a charon for hours on end, so I'm proposing something to help solve the problem and hopefully without unbalancing the game elsewhere.

Implement a new feature, Emergency Warp.

Emergency Warp starts a 30 second timer similar to when logging out in space (possibly with or without modules turned on) where you are then warped a random distance in a random direction (10-99 au?) Any aggressive action that would normally call concord cancels the warp.

You do not need to be aligned for the warp to complete. you simply need to wait the 30 second timer without being attacked in any way, but bumping does not count obviously.

Alernatives or other options to make it more balanced:

-Add a long cooldown timer to prevent repeated abuse (12-24 hours would be pretty fair)

-Warp fatigue after using emergency warp

-Strip shields and even cause armor or hull damage when emergency teleport is used (completed, not started)


I'm not a very experienced pilot so It's very likely that I could be overlooking some glaring issues with this proposal, But I'm open to suggestions and tweaks.


so your asking for an mjd for indis.?



Not a bad idea actually.

Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#170 - 2015-11-11 16:10:05 UTC
Daret wrote:
As for watching local, we're talking highsec here, you try keeping track of the 20+ names that appear and dissapear on the local list every few minutes.


Is it really that hard to hit control + a in local, and just watch for unhighlighted names to appear?

If you're in HS, why aren't you copy/pasting into something like pirates little helper constantly anyway?
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#171 - 2015-11-11 20:50:03 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
You know what I find amusing about these threads? Three things. The first is that those who do the complaining have not, apparently considered the concept of an evolutionary arms race.

Quote:
...an evolutionary arms race is an evolutionary struggle between competing sets of co-evolving genes, traits, or species, that develop adaptations and counter-adaptations against each other, resembling an arms race, which could be, and often are, described as examples of positive feedback.


In this case, we have people whine incessantly to CCP about ganking, and insurance, and how it is all so unfair. CCP nerfs it, and those doing the ganking respond by adapting and getting even better and finding a new method (a large number of ultra cheap high DPS ships along with bumping).

So, the people getting ganked come back and demand that somebody else (CCP) take care of the problem the last nerf was supposed to fix. In short, these people put on a pathetic display of entitlement and self-righteousness while stamping their feet about how they are right and everyone else is wrong...all the while doing, literally, nothing to solve their problems themselves.

We have in one corner the gankers who are:

1. Organized,
2. Well versed in game mechanics,
3. Spending time/effiort setting things up to do ganks.

In the other corner we have the "victims" who:

1. Refuse to organize themselves.
2. Refuse to learn game mechanics.
3. Do not want to spend anything but minimal time/effort to accomplish their goals.

The latter corner also always runs to CCP saying that just one more nerf! Just one more! Give us this one more thing and it will be balanced....until somebody figures out how to gank a ship with the new rule change in which case the crowd of entitled and self-righteous come asking for yet another nerf. For this latter group their standard cant is, the game is not balanced until you implement my preferred nerf...then it will be balanced...until I come asking for yet another nerf...and yet another and another.

And the really amusing thing....these players do not need to be as organized as CODE. and the like. They just need a scout, maybe a webbing alt, and that is about it. If they wanted to be pro-active 10 guys in catalysts would melt your typical bumping machariel. A machariel hull costs about 5x that of 10 catalysts. These players can put billions in a freighter but can't spare a few million for a few catalysts? Really?

You guys deserve everything you get at the hands of players in game.


Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#172 - 2015-11-11 21:05:45 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy.

Because gankers figured out how to make it easy, they didn't beg anyone to make it easier for them.

Quote:
Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts.

You've confused risk mitigation with risk aversion.

Quote:
And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started.

No points for figuring out who's at fault, there.

Quote:
"Care bears" stand to lose a lot more.

Risk vs. reward. Very low risk, high investment for a considerable, steady stream of income as a reward.

Quote:
Gankers don't stand to lose anything.

Get to <-5 sec status. Go do something other than ganking in HiSec. Tell me what you learn.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#173 - 2015-11-11 21:06:35 UTC
Valacus wrote:
I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.

Just one more nerf.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

Black Pedro
Mine.
#174 - 2015-11-11 21:07:36 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.
Freighters have never been mechanically more safe in highsec. I thought we were already at peak safety, and then CCP went and stealth patched hyperdunking out of the game just last week making them even safer. Potential EHP was buffed when low slots were added, CONCORD times have been shortened, and yes, insurance for suicide gankers was removed over five years ago.

Freighter pilots can, with just a little effort, make themselves essentially immune from gankers. Red Frog made 99.8%+ of their contracts last year. How much safer do you want to make these capital ships?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#175 - 2015-11-11 21:41:43 UTC
Valacus wrote:

What do they risk, an insured catalyst?


He doesn't even know that you don't get insurance payouts for ganking.

Here's a tip for all you bears out there. If you don't know the rules of the game you're playing, you don't get to make suggestions of any kind.

"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
#176 - 2015-11-11 22:26:12 UTC
Tyranex Obsoletus wrote:



Not a bad idea actually.



Deep space transports already have them.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#177 - 2015-11-12 00:29:50 UTC
Anyone being bumped can be easily rescued by another character via a wide variety of easily carried out means.

Piloting a freighter isn't some god-given right all characters have, it is a calculated risk you are taking. You can vary the level of risk by a variety of means - modules, scouting, web warp assistance, etc. Or you can take the riskier approach to save time.

If you are stupid enough to pilot a freighter unscouted and unescorted through Uedama, you deserve what is coming to you every bit as much as someone that tries to pilot a loaded up Iteron through Tama.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#178 - 2015-11-12 03:57:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Valacus wrote:


Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.


Ahhh another of my other favorite amusing things.

Know nothings tossing the term "risk averse" around as if it were an insult. Here, let me make the top of your head explode, risk aversion is a good thing...even in EVE. But hey, I'll give you bonus points for spelling it right. Roll

And no...they get no insurance payout. (Obligatory; do you even play the game?)

As for it being mind numbingly easy...how about this then, careful what you Goddamn wish for then. More nerfing of ganking might lead to even more efficient ganking as an adaptation...did you even read the link? Yeah, didn't think so.

I will agree with you that ganking has become more common place....after the nerfs to things like insurance and ganking. Funny that, eh? You and your ilk go whining and crying and moaning and groaning to CCP, they listen and implement nerfs and here you are...moaning, groanking, crying, whinging and complaining that ganking is too easy. Maybe you guys should have STFU last time. And like a bunch of insane people here you are again doing exactly the same thing expecting different results.

You, and everyone like you deserve everything you have gotten at the hands of other players in game. I doubt you'll learn the lesson here. You just are not that smart.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#179 - 2015-11-12 04:11:56 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Valacus wrote:
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.
Freighters have never been mechanically more safe in highsec. I thought we were already at peak safety, and then CCP went and stealth patched hyperdunking out of the game just last week making them even safer. Potential EHP was buffed when low slots were added, CONCORD times have been shortened, and yes, insurance for suicide gankers was removed over five years ago.

Freighter pilots can, with just a little effort, make themselves essentially immune from gankers. Red Frog made 99.8%+ of their contracts last year. How much safer do you want to make these capital ships?


The answer is obvious, 100%.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

admiral root
Red Galaxy
#180 - 2015-11-12 10:35:07 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy...


...and safely (99.9%) moving a freighter through highsec has always been mind-numbingly easy.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff