These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#321 - 2015-11-17 22:00:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Cidanel Afuran
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.

It's more like saying "Using a hammer is legal, using it to bash in someone's skull is not."

Analogies suck.


It's more like "robbing banks is illegal, but causing a scene in front of the bank to draw employees to the window and make it easier for the thief to rob the bank is 100% legal"
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#322 - 2015-11-17 22:09:09 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Not just repeated bumping. Repeated bumping *with the intent to prevent the ship from warping*, in essence using bumping as a form of tackle.

Muddying those waters with acedotes of pushing carriers around in an area of space where other forms of tackle carry no penalties, for peaceful intent, has no bearing. Even if you did get a flag for that, assuming it could happen in high sec, how does such a niche example outweigh the far more common occurance of self defense?

Those being bumped can adapt, but why should they need to in high sec with a ruleset that is supposed to carry penalties for that sort of unprovoked aggression. It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.


I specifically mentioned the costs of increased organization. The point was in answer to the contention that they would become more expensive in a concrete manner that takes the price above that which is currently profitable. It will make it less casual, more of a committed endeavor...but not cost a single ISK more than current, unless there's a mercenary band out there being paid by the hour flying Talos and doing ganks for hire for some bumping master out there.

It's a loophole. Bumping being used as tackle is an emergent use of the physics engine, not an intended feature of the game at release. That makes it interesting, possibly clever, a little funny... But nor necessarily good, balanced, or fun.


You are being very disingenuous Mike. As has been pointed out repeatedly, this mechanic is not aggression. You have been deliberately muddying the waters by calling it aggression when by game standards it quite clearly is not. Further, you are contradictory with your claims. The gankers should have to adapt in HS, but not those being ganked? What? Why are those being ganked special snowflakes? And emergent game play was the very Goddamned core idea of the game from the get go. Eve was never intended to be a theme park game, but a sandbox game with game play being emergent and driven by player actions. To then turn around and say that was not the intent is just laughable (or blindingly hypocritical).

Costs are costs, whether they are ISK related or entail non-ISK related costs. Arbitrarily raising the costs for one group of players to “fix” something that is not even broken (i.e. there are already methods in game to solve the “problem”) is not good, balanced or fun.

And why does ganking have to be a committed and costly business whereas loading up an expensive ship with a huge amount of loot should be a casual business that any moron, literally, can do and not face any consequences for being a complete moron? By the way, you are implicitly agreeing to everything Kaarous Aldurald has written about how those letting themselves get bumped then ganked are bad at playing the 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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#323 - 2015-11-17 22:35:24 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

There is an issue


There is no issue. You are conjuring this out of thin air.

Web your freighter. You have no right, none at all, to be solo in a freighter. The end.

"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.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#324 - 2015-11-17 22:48:28 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
By the way, you are implicitly agreeing to everything Kaarous Aldurald has written about how those letting themselves get bumped then ganked are bad at playing the game.



They always do, even if they don't realize it. They think they have a right to play the game wrong and not suffer any consequences for it.

And because they are selfish and entitled, they think the game should change around their misplaced expectations.

And because they're hypocrites, they think it's okay to de facto delete other playstyles while screaming about how their "playstyle" of being a lazy useless excuse for a player should be protected from all change. They literally think playing the game wrong should be a protected playstyle, because they're special.

And because they always project, everything they claim about ganking "risk averse, low skill, too much reward" actually applies solely to them.

"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.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#325 - 2015-11-17 23:45:18 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.

It's more like saying "Using a hammer is legal, using it to bash in someone's skull is not."

Analogies suck.


It's more like "robbing banks is illegal, but causing a scene in front of the bank to draw employees to the window and make it easier for the thief to rob the bank is 100% legal"


Actually, that would make you an accessory, and would put you away with the robbers.
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#326 - 2015-11-17 23:55:11 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.

It's more like saying "Using a hammer is legal, using it to bash in someone's skull is not."

Analogies suck.


It's more like "robbing banks is illegal, but causing a scene in front of the bank to draw employees to the window and make it easier for the thief to rob the bank is 100% legal"


Actually, that would make you an accessory, and would put you away with the robbers.

You know how at the top of the pyramid I said that "analogies suck".

Yeah, that's why.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#327 - 2015-11-18 00:00:38 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Not just repeated bumping. Repeated bumping *with the intent to prevent the ship from warping*, in essence using bumping as a form of tackle.

Muddying those waters with acedotes of pushing carriers around in an area of space where other forms of tackle carry no penalties, for peaceful intent, has no bearing. Even if you did get a flag for that, assuming it could happen in high sec, how does such a niche example outweigh the far more common occurance of self defense?

Those being bumped can adapt, but why should they need to in high sec with a ruleset that is supposed to carry penalties for that sort of unprovoked aggression. It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.


I specifically mentioned the costs of increased organization. The point was in answer to the contention that they would become more expensive in a concrete manner that takes the price above that which is currently profitable. It will make it less casual, more of a committed endeavor...but not cost a single ISK more than current, unless there's a mercenary band out there being paid by the hour flying Talos and doing ganks for hire for some bumping master out there.

It's a loophole. Bumping being used as tackle is an emergent use of the physics engine, not an intended feature of the game at release. That makes it interesting, possibly clever, a little funny... But nor necessarily good, balanced, or fun.


You are being very disingenuous Mike. As has been pointed out repeatedly, this mechanic is not aggression. You have been deliberately muddying the waters by calling it aggression when by game standards it quite clearly is not. Further, you are contradictory with your claims. The gankers should have to adapt in HS, but not those being ganked? What? Why are those being ganked special snowflakes? And emergent game play was the very Goddamned core idea of the game from the get go. Eve was never intended to be a theme park game, but a sandbox game with game play being emergent and driven by player actions. To then turn around and say that was not the intent is just laughable (or blindingly hypocritical).

Costs are costs, whether they are ISK related or entail non-ISK related costs. Arbitrarily raising the costs for one group of players to “fix” something that is not even broken (i.e. there are already methods in game to solve the “problem”) is not good, balanced or fun.

And why does ganking have to be a committed and costly business whereas loading up an expensive ship with a huge amount of loot should be a casual business that any moron, literally, can do and not face any consequences for being a complete moron? By the way, you are implicitly agreeing to everything Kaarous Aldurald has written about how those letting themselves get bumped then ganked are bad at playing the game.



The reasoning for likening it to other aggressive acts is sound. The limits of a 15 year old AI script isn't an excuse for poor game design. The ones being disingenuous are those deliberately ignoring that I have clearly stated I do not mean to say bumping grants any sort of flag, and in fact is the thrust of my proposed fix.

I don't say gankers have to adapt. They just will. No one forces them into a criminal profession. Nothing wrong with playing a criminal, just in subverting rules meant to provide a measure of protection from them.

As with all else, concord isn't meant to prevent criminal or aggressive action, just provide a barrier of entry. Time and again gankers have found ways around that balance point and CCP has made changes to restore it. There is evidence to suggest it's time to do so again.

Emergent may be part of core, but it's not infallible, untouchable, holy, nor always the way to go. Things that are harmful to the game can result, and when they do they should be addressed.

Loading up your ship and autopiloting around will never be safe. Attacking it should never be protected by Concord however.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#328 - 2015-11-18 00:02:55 UTC
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.

It's more like saying "Using a hammer is legal, using it to bash in someone's skull is not."

Analogies suck.


It's more like "robbing banks is illegal, but causing a scene in front of the bank to draw employees to the window and make it easier for the thief to rob the bank is 100% legal"


Actually, that would make you an accessory, and would put you away with the robbers.

You know how at the top of the pyramid I said that "analogies suck".

Yeah, that's why.

I don't know, your hammer analogy was better than my zebra thing. Pretty spot on.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#329 - 2015-11-18 00:04:15 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

The reasoning for likening it to other aggressive acts is sound.


No, it's not, it's self serving nonsense.

"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.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#330 - 2015-11-18 00:07:35 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

The reasoning for likening it to other aggressive acts is sound.


No, it's not, it's self serving nonsense.


Even if it were true (which it isn't), I've provided him with four options that do not require going suspect or criminal that will save a ship from being bumped, or that will get it out of trouble once it is bumped. Of course, facts are a bit inconvenient when you're trying to whine for one more nerf.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#331 - 2015-11-18 00:09:58 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

The reasoning for likening it to other aggressive acts is sound.


No, it's not, it's self serving nonsense.


Even if it were true (which it isn't), I've provided him with four options that do not require going suspect or criminal that will save a ship from being bumped, or that will get it out of trouble once it is bumped. Of course, facts are a bit inconvenient when you're trying to whine for one more nerf.


Which is of course what this is about. Mike there thinks that people have a right to be afk in a billion isk ship and never worry about dying.

Meanwhile, somehow Red Frog, who I use myself(and whom I have failed to infiltrate not once but twice now), are completing the vast, vast majority of their deliveries. It's almost like there isn't a game balance issue here, it's almost like some people are just plain doing it 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.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#332 - 2015-11-18 03:41:40 UTC
Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that
Tremain Oldfield
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#333 - 2015-11-18 04:00:59 UTC
I would much rather see a self-destruct mod which takes out anything with in a 5-10k range made to fit on freighters. SUICIDE TO THE RESCUE Pirate
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#334 - 2015-11-18 04:05:24 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that


You still haven't explained why a criminal flag is necessary in the first place. You have at least four non-aggressive counters to being bumped.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Paladin Genghis Khanid
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#335 - 2015-11-18 04:13:27 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Sorry, I truncated the rest of your rant as it progressively got more and more insane and is not really worth responding to. However, I will point out your "solution" would have no effect on bumping. If anything, it would increase the need for bumpers in order to give time for the criminals to make their way to the target from lowsec to attack the target. Bumpers are without exception, neutral pilots and thus would not be affected at all by even the most draconian penalties for gankers like you have proposed.

It would be much simpler, and easier for CCP to implement, just to lock out offensive modules in highsec against unflagged targets. I guess this is really what you are trying to propose with your convoluted list of penalties and yes, that would solve bumping by making suicide ganking impossible. But why should CCP do that? They have explicitly coded suicide ganking, Crimewatch, CONCORD and the other systems to allow criminals to operate in highsec. Why would they throw all that work away now? How would that make the game better?


Is everything you disagree with a rant?

I'm proposing that an area of space that is supposed to be high security not allow those who have repeatedly demonstrated that they are criminals and have -10 security standings not be allowed to carry on in so-call high security space as if they weren't known criminals. The idea that a known criminal can dock and enjoy the privileges afforded to law abiding citizens is an absurdity. I'm also in favor of said criminals not being able to be tracked initially by CONCORD (assuming their ships/clones were made in null via player stations) if they enter via wormhole. And to be able to escape CONCORD's unscathed through wormholes along with other criminal perks which would just be completely off-topic.

For me I have no desire to be a pirate because it does not exist in EVE. You can never actual function as a pirate. The mechanics of the game in that regard are silly. I'd rather there was no high sec at all and force player cooperation/policing than this absurd coddling carebear system where actions have no consequence. How anyone can think a person being able to tackle another person in high sec with no serious risk to their own ship is beyond me. It would be like me attacking a flashing yellow player and they being unable to fight back.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#336 - 2015-11-18 04:23:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP.


No it's not. Don't even lie, you're already on record here several times as saying that this isn't even really about bumping, you just want ganking nerfed.

A criminal or suspect flag will never be applied to anyone based on what direction their engines are pointed.

"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.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#337 - 2015-11-18 05:12:51 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that


Now that is, IMO, a lie.

"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
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#338 - 2015-11-18 05:12:59 UTC
Paladin Genghis Khanid wrote:


For me I have no desire to be a pirate because it does not exist in EVE. You can never actual function as a pirate.


Hi Bat Country here.

We specialize in attacking shipping in highsec for profit. Remind us again what a pirate does.
Iain Cariaba
#339 - 2015-11-18 05:20:42 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that

Yet there is zero reason why you should need an invitation to gank someone bumping a freighter. I've already demonstrated how little doing so impacts sec status, and others have shown that the isk cost of the ships to gank the bumper are also negligible. You only need to step outside your self perceived delusion that ganking makes you a bad person to realize that you don't need further mechanics that will ultimately only serve to make bad game play safer.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#340 - 2015-11-18 05:25:03 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
You only need to step outside your self perceived delusion that ganking makes you a bad person to realize that you don't need further mechanics that will ultimately only serve to make bad game play safer.


He wants to make bad gameplay safer. Anything else he says is a lie and a smokescreen.

"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.