EVE General Discussion

Yep, you managed to bring me down to your level.



That is an incredibly low opinion you have on the pvp abilities of gankers. I doubt even the most hardcore anti-ganker thinks they're that bad at the game.

Do warp disruptors not work at all in high? Do they stop working at low sec status? Do you think gankers are so accustomed to bumping, so reliant on bumping that if bumping is addressed, they'll just throw up their hands and stop instead of adapting their methods?

I think they'll have to react faster. I think they'll have to choose yes or no faster. I think they won't be able to spend a lot of time trying to extort someone for ransom, they can't keep someone stuck on grid for 5 minutes while assembling the fleet and positioning it. But I think they'll still be perfectly capable of having their 20-25 second window or however long it is to be firing. It might even lead to more ganking if they err on the side of shooting instead of taking more time to decide.

Ganking is fine. Ganking as a concept is fair. The ability to gank needs to not be removed. The ability to hold someone on grid without any action the game views as aggressive, and to do it indefinitely, without any repercussion, is not fine & not fair & should be addressed.



I agree with most of what you posted, and think your proposed solution is intriguing. Also appreciate the attempt to discuss the actual issue. Interested to hear any feedback on what I suggested earlier, basically that if in highsec (or in high & low) without a cloak equipped, that while accelerating as part of an align to, warp to or jump command, your ship is intangible and can't be bumped by other players. But can still be tackled, shot at or otherwise aggressed. And will still collide with stations, large collidables and any other non-player object.

The bit I don't agree with is the last sentence of what I quoted, and the expanded version earlier. You identify a nice progression of 3 methods to 2 methods to 1 method for null->low->high. But for me, the basic premise of high is that you are not immune to aggression, anyone is free to attack you if they choose. But that anyone who does choose to do so loses their ship & some sec status. And same deal in low, except that anyone who chooses to aggress gets a suspect timer, a sec loss and fired on by gate/station guns. Bumping circumvents that aggression & consequence mechanic.

An even simpler alternative to what either of us suggested would be that ship to ship bumping never happens, unless there is an engagement timer between the two ships involved. Then bumping can happen perfectly well in all 3 types of space, subject to the progressive consequences for an aggressive act in those 3 types (i.e. none, minor, heavy). Again the issue I can see there is trying to decloak someone and collide with them in order to get more time to point them properly. Or perhaps unintended consequences if 2 ships become engaged when one is inside another.

They work for as long as it takes concord to show up or for a player to shoot them, yes?




You seem to include this in every post, responding like one of Pavlov's dogs. Yet it continues to not be true. It is demonstrably wrong to say the only reason anybody could possibly have for changing the mechanics of bumping is their own personal interest in reducing the number of ganks. It is also not at all clear to me that changing bumping would actually result in less ganks. It is clear to me that it would result in fairer ganks though.



So you say 'Bumping is a requirement to gank successfully, remove it and you remove ganking.'
You also say 'Bumping does not circumvent aggression.'

So you'll have to pardon me when I conclude that you think ganking is not an aggressive act.

So on this 1v1 argument you are all missing a big fact. Freighters were never made to go 1v1. They were added as a corp level asset to be used to ferry supplies and goods between null low and highsec in a convoy. They are specifically designed to be best used with an escort and are just as helpless as a beam rev is helpless vs a dictor. It doesn't matter is the bulk of people chose to go solo in these ships or not they were designed to require a convoy. It's a deliberate weakness that serves as a drawback for being able carry so much cargo.

now as I pointed out we have several very easy ways to both avoid and get out of bumping and yes it does require at least on friend but frankly that's a good thing. We should all want there to be reasons for people to want to work with others as all evidence point to people who play with others on a regular basis stay with eve far longer than those who don't.

BTW I'll note that the anti-bumping crowd seem to thing the notion that the gankers have to use many players is reasonable, but God forbid that the freighter pilot have even one trusted friend in game. Why that latter requirement is just completely nonsensical.

Lets go through it. We have an alliance usually. Somebody who has probably set up comms, there is probably a logistics group moving ships, modules and ammo around. Scouts. Bumpers. Maybe even and SRP app on their website. Somebody has set up the stuff to pull API information as well. Then there is the fleet itself with an FC who herds all the cats.

But all of this...is to be defeated by some imprudent ignoramus who screwed up multiple times to wind up being bumped in some of the most notorious systems in game.

By all means reward the screw ups who have their blinders on so tight they may not even know that the other people they see in local--if they have it open, which they probably don't--are also other players and not NPCs. And that if you do try an convo them and warn them of the Mach sitting on the Uedama in gate....they block you.

Yup...those players need just a little bit more hand holding and why...the game will be perfect.

And why was that guy sitting there being bumped for over an hour? Because the gankers ganked 3 idiot freighter pilots before him and were waiting out their criminal timers.

Maybe we should reduce the criminal timers to reduce bumping duration?

Keep in mind those Kusion fleets. Best you keep silent before more people start asking.

Well said Herzog, I have to say that Salvos Rhoska and Miriam Beckstein have all nailed this too.

I could not help myself and peaked at the last post by Teckos and he made some point about having to wait out their criminal timers so baumping them to hold them in position is fair, what the hell!!!! They have to take a choice on who they gank, not stack up plush targets like that, because during that period smart players could then make their trip to by pass the gankers, that rewards people who are aware of what is going on around them and who do not have multiple accounts to move stuff. This is Eve for me, not certain cash cows stacked up for factory style ganks to a load of entitled whiney players who tell me that ganking will end if bumping is not allowed, more like their easy game will end and they have to up their game.

Anyway, I just want to give a huge shout out of respect to both Salvos Rhoska and Miriam Beckstein for their posts here.

Keep them in mind? Why?

He gets reported every day as far as I'm aware and CCP have had no problem so far it seems.

My main warped through Uedama today just after he'd ganked some other lazy hauler:

https://puu.sh/sZCBk/aef315ddf3.jpg

So who cares about the Kusion fleet. He is only a threat to the lazy and incompetent.

But you bot aligned players pointing out Kusion is funny. Happy with all the real bots and want to complain about non-bots.

Classic apologist behaviour.

Hmm, if Kusion gets away with it, then loyalanon was removed for "that other reason".

Damage control as expected. It's too late, kid. Let's see resources now go for the real issue: bumping. The mechanic that needs to be addressed finally. The strawman of ganking and "Hurrr durr lazy/idiot/normy/peopleIprojectagainstbecausereallife carebears beg CCP for nerf" can be set aside as another issue entirely.

Please be a man and change the title of the thread to "The Mutuality of Freighter Bumping".

The only people who get bumped are either ignorant or imprudent. Neither of which should get a break. They should lose their stuff.