These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Balancing bumping and looting mechanics

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#921 - 2016-02-05 16:15:09 UTC
Enabran' Tain wrote:
Solution: Create a game mechanic that works like this: If one player bumps another a certain number of times within a certain amount of time, at a certain speed, the aggressor gets a suspect timer for just the aggressed and everyone in his fleet, to attack.

Vectors: The speed and mass of the ship could play a part
in rather or not it is registered as an actual aggressive bump, as micro warp drives are needed and they increase the mass of the ship greatly.

Example: Bumper bumps an orca 5 times in 30 minutes, he gets a suspect timer and can be shot, but if the bumper tries to bump the orca into other ships multiple times, it will not cause a suspect timer for the Orca due to lack of necessary speed for it to register as an aggressive bump.

Conclusion: There is no instance or reason someone could bump into someone, outside their fleet, 5 times in 30 minutes unless it was on purpose and done deliberately.

The speed and mass would literally determine an aggressive bump. Hitting someone going several thousand k/sec multiple times in minutes would earn a suspect time.

I am so excited about this, I currently mash F5 every 10 seconds to see if this feature makes it into the patch notes.

Evil RatKid
Mag's
Azn Empire
#922 - 2016-02-05 16:24:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Enabran' Tain wrote:
Solution: Create a game mechanic that works like this: If one player bumps another a certain number of times within a certain amount of time, at a certain speed, the aggressor gets a suspect timer for just the aggressed and everyone in his fleet, to attack.

Vectors: The speed and mass of the ship could play a part
in rather or not it is registered as an actual aggressive bump, as micro warp drives are needed and they increase the mass of the ship greatly.

Example: Bumper bumps an orca 5 times in 30 minutes, he gets a suspect timer and can be shot, but if the bumper tries to bump the orca into other ships multiple times, it will not cause a suspect timer for the Orca due to lack of necessary speed for it to register as an aggressive bump.

Conclusion: There is no instance or reason someone could bump into someone, outside their fleet, 5 times in 30 minutes unless it was on purpose and done deliberately.

The speed and mass would literally determine an aggressive bump. Hitting someone going several thousand k/sec multiple times in minutes would earn a suspect time.

I am so excited about this, I currently mash F5 every 10 seconds to see if this feature makes it into the patch notes.
Oh thank Bob. I thought I was the only one. Oops

Literally the sooner the better tbh.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
ISD Fractal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#923 - 2016-02-05 16:43:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Fractal
Quote:
13. Spamming is prohibited.

Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words “first”, “go back to insert other game name” and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post, or the practice of “thread necromancy” which involved bumping of old threads for no justifiable reason.

27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.


I have removed several posts by the same individual posting their ideas over and over again (I left the most recent up). Please post one idea and don't spam the forums to increase visibility. Additionally, I have removed all references to a lengthy side-discussion about wreck HP that does not belong in this thread.

ISD Fractal

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#924 - 2016-02-05 17:16:56 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Mazzara wrote:
bumping is a cheap risk free way of holding someone in place, and just because ccp is ok with it doesn't make is any less cheap or any less of a mechanic that needs to be fixed.



It's not risk free, though. There's the risk that a group of valiant white knights might suicide gank you, for instance.

There's also the risk that nobody stupid enough to allow themselves to be bumped will come along and you'll just sit about wasting your time.

Of course, both of these risks are significantly mitigated by the unwillingness of people to actually do something other than whine and cry like a toddler with a scraped knee. Lol


Sorry but I don't buy into the constant chant of: "you can do it to me as well"
- well I don't want to do it to you
- I don't want to play like you
- if you play like a douche, I don't want to also be a douche..

I want the game mechanics/rules to treat you like a criminal whenever you act like one.
- as always, I'm talking about when in HISEC.

I even want you banned from HISEC if you're a habitual criminal.

These are reasonable expectations for people who prefer to play "casually"..
- and don't give me the BS about I shouldn't be playing THIS game or I'm playing it wrong..

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
Black Pedro
Mine.
#925 - 2016-02-05 17:20:11 UTC
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?
True enough for the fleetmate, not for the tackle due to weapons timers, however that risk is there for every ship, not just freighters. Also please explain the term troll tackle.


under pedros proposal, the risk of troll tackle is only there for freighters, due to there not being a concord response , as there would in any other case of illegally tackling any other ship in hisec.

troll tackling = tackling a freighter with no intent to properly engage, doing it for giggles, a bit like the troll inty concept regarding entosis mechanics that i'm sure you've heard about.

tho if pedros suggestion only allowed point rather than scram , then the mjd to escape the point would of course help prevent this being abused too much.


Since the tackler would be suspect, I am not sure why it would be any worse than other spaces. You can "troll tackle" a ship in a tanked Legion in low sec, but eventually someone will come by and explode you. If you "troll tackle" in a cheap frigate, your death should be even faster to a passerby or to friends of the capital pilot.

Why should you be able to just MJD away from any attacker? Seems like a solo, get-out-of-PvP-card to me.

Freighters are suppose to be a vulnerable ship that needs fleet support. Allowing them to MJD away without any consequence from any threat is way too OP. You are not entitled to be free from non-consensual interaction of other players in this game, especially when you are piloting an incredibly powerful capital ship like a freighter.


The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#926 - 2016-02-05 17:22:46 UTC
Enabran' Tain wrote:
Solution: Create a game mechanic that works like this: If one player bumps another a certain number of times within a certain amount of time, at a certain speed, the aggressor gets a suspect timer for just the aggressed and everyone in his fleet, to attack.

Vectors: The speed and mass of the ship could play a part
in rather or not it is registered as an actual aggressive bump, as micro warp drives are needed and they increase the mass of the ship greatly.

Example: Bumper bumps an orca 5 times in 30 minutes, he gets a suspect timer and can be shot, but if the bumper tries to bump the orca into other ships multiple times, it will not cause a suspect timer for the Orca due to lack of necessary speed for it to register as an aggressive bump.

Conclusion: There is no instance or reason someone could bump into someone, outside their fleet, 5 times in 30 minutes unless it was on purpose and done deliberately.

The speed and mass would literally determine an aggressive bump. Hitting someone going several thousand k/sec multiple times in minutes would earn a suspect time.


..if the targetted ship was prevented from entering warp as a result of these collisions . the suspect timer imo after a few minutes would effectively remove bumping as a tactic in hisec from the game, which is imo too drastic a measure.

i have no problem with bumping per se, just the potentially unlimited bumping with no consequence for the bumper that exists at current time.
gankers should be able to use bumping to get a freighter out of range of guns to allow a gank attempt , but mechanics should be balanced to bring a level of risk beyond what is required for a reasonably organised gank squad to kill the target.
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#927 - 2016-02-05 17:28:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Bella Jennie
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mazzara wrote:
bumping is a cheap risk free way of holding someone in place, and just because ccp is ok with it doesn't make is any less cheap or any less of a mechanic that needs to be fixed.

bumpers grab at straws to justify their exploiting of this weak mechanic, and cry about anything that would change that.

Now don't get me wrong, if you wanna gank feighters in high sec more power to ya, but you should have to use a legit tackle and get the concord hammer like anyone else


Anyone else can bump too.

What does that actually mean?

Are you suggesting that a broken, unrealistic game mechanic should be retained "forever" because it can be used equally by all players?

That makes no sense to me because as I stated here previously:
- I don't want to play like you.

And NO, not everyone can use the BUMPING EXPLOIT in the same way..
- I don't "multibox" so IF I did bump, there's no follow up.
- I'm not part of some ganking troop.. no interest either.

And there must, or at least should be a wide range of ways to play a game - or frankly it would suck - and certainly it would NOT be the "sandbox" that all the power players seem to constantly invoke.

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#928 - 2016-02-05 17:31:35 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?
True enough for the fleetmate, not for the tackle due to weapons timers, however that risk is there for every ship, not just freighters. Also please explain the term troll tackle.


under pedros proposal, the risk of troll tackle is only there for freighters, due to there not being a concord response , as there would in any other case of illegally tackling any other ship in hisec.

troll tackling = tackling a freighter with no intent to properly engage, doing it for giggles, a bit like the troll inty concept regarding entosis mechanics that i'm sure you've heard about.

tho if pedros suggestion only allowed point rather than scram , then the mjd to escape the point would of course help prevent this being abused too much.


Since the tackler would be suspect, I am not sure why it would be any worse than other spaces. You can "troll tackle" a ship in a tanked Legion in low sec, but eventually someone will come by and explode you. If you "troll tackle" in a cheap frigate, your death should be even faster to a passerby or to friends of the capital pilot.

Why should you be able to just MJD away from any attacker? Seems like a solo, get-out-of-PvP-card to me.

Freighters are suppose to be a vulnerable ship that needs fleet support. Allowing them to MJD away without any consequence from any threat is way too OP. You are not entitled to be free from non-consensual interaction of other players in this game, especially when you are piloting an incredibly powerful capital ship like a freighter.




sorry pedro, i was replying to a query posted a while back, if you read my previous posts on your idea, you'll see that i was trying to figure out the potential consequences resulting from the radical changes you suggested.

of course you are aware that mjd is only affected by scram, so a freighter pilot would be able to escape a long point by using mjd, however he will then be unable to re-use the mjd for up to 5 mins afterwards .

as a way to prevent troll tackling from becoming an issue, what about only interdictor class ships would be capable of holding a freighter in hisec without conc intervention,,,?
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#929 - 2016-02-05 17:31:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima Wreckyou
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Enabran' Tain wrote:
Solution: Create a game mechanic that works like this: If one player bumps another a certain number of times within a certain amount of time, at a certain speed, the aggressor gets a suspect timer for just the aggressed and everyone in his fleet, to attack.

Vectors: The speed and mass of the ship could play a part
in rather or not it is registered as an actual aggressive bump, as micro warp drives are needed and they increase the mass of the ship greatly.

Example: Bumper bumps an orca 5 times in 30 minutes, he gets a suspect timer and can be shot, but if the bumper tries to bump the orca into other ships multiple times, it will not cause a suspect timer for the Orca due to lack of necessary speed for it to register as an aggressive bump.

Conclusion: There is no instance or reason someone could bump into someone, outside their fleet, 5 times in 30 minutes unless it was on purpose and done deliberately.

The speed and mass would literally determine an aggressive bump. Hitting someone going several thousand k/sec multiple times in minutes would earn a suspect time.


..if the targetted ship was prevented from entering warp as a result of these collisions . the suspect timer imo after a few minutes would effectively remove bumping as a tactic in hisec from the game, which is imo too drastic a measure.

i have no problem with bumping per se, just the potentially unlimited bumping with no consequence for the bumper that exists at current time.
gankers should be able to use bumping to get a freighter out of range of guns to allow a gank attempt , but mechanics should be balanced to bring a level of risk beyond what is required for a reasonably organised gank squad to kill the target.

Now look at that, my two favored game designers are about to merge their ideas. Now I am getting really excited. Highsec is about to get really interesting for everyone.

Now if only Rham would join in, I would completely lose it.

Evil RatKid
Mag's
Azn Empire
#930 - 2016-02-05 17:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Bella Jennie wrote:
These are reasonable expectations for people who prefer to play "casually"..
- and don't give me the BS about I shouldn't be playing THIS game or I'm playing it wrong..
No they really are not reasonable. You're asking for the game to change for you, instead of adapting to it.

If you play soccer then decide you don't like just kicking the ball, pick it up and run with it, you will not succeed. Same as with Chess. You may not like how certain pieces move, that doesn't mean you can change the rules to suit. Or playing CoD and wanting to be left alone and not shot, because you want to investigate the map.

The point is you don't play soccer and expect rugby. You don't play Chess expecting checkers and you don't play CoD for a local tourist site.

Quite frankly your stance in this regard, is ridiculous.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#931 - 2016-02-05 17:59:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Bella Jennie
This is still referencing the issue of BUMPING for the purpose of ganking without fear of any consequence to the bumping ship...

A very common excuse for this "feature" to be retained - even is HISEC - is that when you play Eve, it is ESSENTIAL that others can "ruin your day" any time, any where and any how..

You should not be able to feel safe ANYWHERE! anytime..
(I suppose that if there was some way to screw with you while docked, the gank 'em proponents would love it)

Really? Is "the biggest" draw of Eve the ability of players to act like jerks?

Is non-consensual PVP a "cornerstone" of this game for real?
- if that's the case, logic tells me that it's about the ability to pick on the weak.

Is that it? The ability to pick on the weak?

Is there really NO OTHER WAY to play Eve without engaging in PVP, joining a large corp and becoming a "pirate".
- I mean judging from the responses here, if you want to be a miner you're stupid, lazy scum to be harassed at every opportunity; EVEN in HISEC. (I had asked: why even have HISEC then?)

Indeed; why even have mining then?

I stated that I wanted to play in HISEC and just be reasonably safe. This caused heads to explode and the hate posts went through the roof! (well, those are your jerk players I referred to)

My thinking is that a game must evolve over time; CCP is doing it constantly and that's great.
I think a game should have options to play in a wide variety of styles - even including a bit of douchery to spice it up Blink
- THAT is a REAL sandbox IMHO. Not a game overrun with jerks.

So I wonder if a MODERATOR could possibly jump in and confirm this one way or another.
- or at least give a bit of insight into this.

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
Mag's
Azn Empire
#932 - 2016-02-05 18:04:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Bella Jennie wrote:


I stated that I wanted to play in HISEC and just be reasonably safe. This caused heads to explode and the hate posts went through the roof! (well, those are your jerk players I referred to).
Wrong again. We asked what you meant by reasonably safe. If you don't think 99.9% is reasonable, just what is?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#933 - 2016-02-05 18:10:39 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:


I stated that I wanted to play in HISEC and just be reasonably safe. This caused heads to explode and the hate posts went through the roof! (well, those are your jerk players I referred to).
Wrong again. We asked what you meant by reasonably safe. Of you don't think 99.9% is reasonable, just what is?


I'm not going to define this by a number - that's just a clever debating trap.

I have repeatedly stated that:

*** I want you to be tagged as a criminal IF you act like one in HISEC ***

That's as best as I can state it right now - but with more (SINCERE) debate, new ideas, new definitions will spawn..

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
Mag's
Azn Empire
#934 - 2016-02-05 18:13:52 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:


I stated that I wanted to play in HISEC and just be reasonably safe. This caused heads to explode and the hate posts went through the roof! (well, those are your jerk players I referred to).
Wrong again. We asked what you meant by reasonably safe. Of you don't think 99.9% is reasonable, just what is?


I'm not going to define this by a number - that's just a clever debating trap.

I have repeatedly stated that:

*** I want you to be tagged as a criminal IF you act like one in HISEC ***

That's as best as I can state it right now - but with more (SINCERE) debate, new ideas, new definitions will spawn..

Seeing as that is already the case, what's the problem?

Oh and since when we're facts and figures a trap?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#935 - 2016-02-05 18:19:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Bella Jennie
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
These are reasonable expectations for people who prefer to play "casually"..
- and don't give me the BS about I shouldn't be playing THIS game or I'm playing it wrong..
No they really are not reasonable. You're asking for the game to change for you, instead of adapting to it.

If you play soccer then decide you don't like just kicking the ball, pick it up and run with it, you will not succeed. Same as with Chess. You may not like how certain pieces move, that doesn't mean you can change the rules to suit. Or playing CoD and wanting to be left alone and not shot, because you want to investigate the map.

The point is you don't play soccer and expect rugby. You don't play Chess expecting checkers and you don't play CoD for a local tourist site.

Quite frankly your stance in this regard, is ridiculous.


I'm "asking the game to change for me" - OMFG!!!!!

What if I had a really sound idea?

You guys act like it's impossible to change a game.. however CCP is doing quite a lot of that.

One last point and it relates to an on-line game business model. CCP is after all, in business.

Suppose NEW players join Eve.. suppose they prefer playing in styles a bit different from the diehard Eve veterans..
- are you saying CCP should in no way cater to them? yet I notice CCP trying to broaden appeal to attract more players

- are you suggesting this should be an exclusive game - maintained in a specific manner to the satisfaction of the veterans?
yet I see CCP making changes in gameplay at the outrage of the most fervent veterans..
(look at the hate over SKILL TRADING! OMG!)

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#936 - 2016-02-05 18:24:01 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:


I stated that I wanted to play in HISEC and just be reasonably safe. This caused heads to explode and the hate posts went through the roof! (well, those are your jerk players I referred to).
Wrong again. We asked what you meant by reasonably safe. Of you don't think 99.9% is reasonable, just what is?


I'm not going to define this by a number - that's just a clever debating trap.

I have repeatedly stated that:

*** I want you to be tagged as a criminal IF you act like one in HISEC ***

That's as best as I can state it right now - but with more (SINCERE) debate, new ideas, new definitions will spawn..

Seeing as that is already the case, what's the problem?

Oh and since when we're facts and figures a trap?


Seriously? Are you for real? WTF?

you know damn well what we are discussing here:
BUMPING is currently NOT a crime; it has no consequences from the POLICE.


this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#937 - 2016-02-05 18:27:59 UTC
to recap, my suggestions to rebalance bumping to prevent or limit the extended (ab)use of this tactic with no consequence for the bumper are;

1/have an inbuilt limited use mjd on freighters as a tool to escape harassment from bumping. criticisms have been this is not enough to counter bumping in it's current form, to it being a 'get out of jail free card' for freighters.

2/ have a bumper obtain a flag after a certain amount of time that would enable the freighter pilots fleet to engage the bumper in a 'limited fleet engagement' type timer without interference from concord, also allowing the bumper to engage the freighter when activated.

i believe the 2nd option can be coded in such a way to prevent abuse / flagging from accidental collisions fairly easily as i have outlined in previous posts .



Mag's
Azn Empire
#938 - 2016-02-05 18:28:29 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
These are reasonable expectations for people who prefer to play "casually"..
- and don't give me the BS about I shouldn't be playing THIS game or I'm playing it wrong..
No they really are not reasonable. You're asking for the game to change for you, instead of adapting to it.

If you play soccer then decide you don't like just kicking the ball, pick it up and run with it, you will not succeed. Same as with Chess. You may not like how certain pieces move, that doesn't mean you can change the rules to suit. Or playing CoD and wanting to be left alone and not shot, because you want to investigate the map.

The point is you don't play soccer and expect rugby. You don't play Chess expecting checkers and you don't play CoD for a local tourist site.

Quite frankly your stance in this regard, is ridiculous.


I'm "asking the game to change for me" - OMFG!!!!!

You are yes. You're asking for the core of the game to change, because you don't want to play the game. The whole 'your way my way' stance, doesn't mean the core of the game should change. Highsec is already reasonably safe. If you don't want to use the tools and options currently available, that doesn't mean the game has to change. That figure you and others hate so much, 99.9%, is based on factual evidence and directly concerns this topic. So again I ask, when the odds are so high in your favour, just what is reasonable to you?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bella Jennie
Doomheim
#939 - 2016-02-05 18:32:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Bella Jennie
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
to recap, my suggestions to rebalance bumping to prevent or limit the extended (ab)use of this tactic with no consequence for the bumper are;

1/have an inbuilt limited use mjd on freighters as a tool to escape harassment from bumping. criticisms have been this is not enough to counter bumping in it's current form, to it being a 'get out of jail free card' for freighters.

2/ have a bumper obtain a flag after a certain amount of time that would enable the freighter pilots fleet to engage the bumper in a 'limited fleet engagement' type timer without interference from concord, also allowing the bumper to engage the freighter when activated.

i believe the 2nd option can be coded in such a way to prevent abuse / flagging from accidental collisions fairly easily as i have outlined in previous posts .



The way I see it, a "GET OUT OF GANK CARD" for freighters is a great thing ---

---> as long as BUMPERS have an "AVOID JAIL ALTOGETHER CARD"

edited because I forgot to say: "in HISEC only" Blink

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#940 - 2016-02-05 18:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: bigbud skunkafella
@Bella Jennie , please don't let them derail the thread , it is their intention to get it locked by disrupting the discussion as much as possible. stay on topic and let us hear any thoughts you have on the topic

sorry , cross posted ^^ Smile