Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You know what would be awesome…is if the anti-ganking “community” actually got serious and stopped screwing around, especially in the cases of the long period bumping instances. Do they have a corporation or alliance? No. Do they pre-position assets? No. Do they have a comms system so they can communicate more quickly? Do they use some sort of IRC style method of keeping people informed? No. Have they thought about doing something really effective, like getting into CODE with an alt spy and try to learn who is moving ships and stuff for ganking? Maybe go gank that guy.

Instead they come here and complain hoping “mom and dad” will do something to help people instead of people helping themselves.

And the ironic thing is…to gank a bumping ship it would take far, far fewer people—i.e. the herding cats problem is a lot less of a problem.

Maybe CCP can create a new in game item….cheese, and we can start contracting cheese to these anti-gankers to go with their whine.

That's the whole core of the mechanic here. You can "point" a ship if it's agility is too low and the game does not and probably never will have a way to "see" this. Even if a game rule was made to combat it, the engine would not be able to enforce it without breaking many more things in the game. There are probably thousands of un-intended collision in the game for every intended bump.

Still, I usually laugh when I try to picture the same things IRL where a bunch of tug boats would mess around with a freighter moving him away from his intended heading.

Oh it's absolutely doable too. I've seen tugs push much bigger ships out of ice floes, when I used to live in Alaska.

And we all know, or at least those of us who aren't ignorant anti gankers, that this game uses a fluidic physics model. I laugh every time I see someone say that it's not "realistic", because they don't have a clue.

I meant more along the line of a ship wanting to enter harbor and a buch of tugs just going "**** you!!!" and spinning it back toward high sea.

Your proposal makes the game safer for haulers and provides antigankers with risk free pvp.

Whether I individually benefit from the mechanic or not, the proposal reduces risk for people that don't deserve it. If a freighter pilot can't be bothered to take basic safety measures, then they don't deserve the game to save them. That applies to me too.

I don't play the game because it is easy and can be played lazily.

I'm all for change where there is a problem, but I'm not for making the game easier if no problem exists.

So far, no one anywhere has demonstrated that a problem exists and it all boils down to wanting to shoot but have no risk in doing so with the effect of protecting the stupid.

Show me the evidence of a problem and I'll support the change. Until then, I'll continue to look for evidence myself and so far, all the evidence says the opposite. There is no reason to change the game in terms of bumping or looting.

Up to this point, while I totally agree that this is a community game, it seems only your view of what that means is important. No one else's. Hardly a community approach to suggesting change is it? Make it evidence based to show a problem for the community and there'll be support. But don't push 'it's a community game', when these changes are about personal bias.

Are you comparing RL with Eve... Tist tist, but ok.. lets play, then the Freighter calls in the coast guard and says I am being bumped by Hostels. And then they respond with a few Cutters, will they get there in time!? WHo knows... maybe a Helicopter is sent.. We can do that if you like. Call Concord?

Must admit, I really can't see the benefit in this sort of thing when suggesting change.

At the end of all the discussion, the only people that can implement mechanics changes are CCP and in order to do it, they'll need to be pursuaded by the quality of the arguments.

What's going to be more convincing:

A well structured argument, supported by evidence, where the suggestions are supported by the data?

Or

A thread full of mud slinging and personal attacks?

It very much was, and you made yourself look foolish.

What evidence?

None has been posted showing that an issue exists at all.

You my friend need to start trolling somewhere else with a comment at this point of the discussion. This problem exists and have been perceived by many people. Again CCP can validate our claims. Or just swing by Uedama and watch, it really would not be hard to see it happen.