Warfare & Tactics

Isk faucet.



Isk faucet.



Has risk regardless of what ship you're in & does affect other players, unless you're implying that the ore mined is simply trashed by the miners instead of being refined or sold.

Now in regards to highsec missions & incursions, I'm not implying that isk faucets are bad, but they are ridiculously high for being in highsec. Sure it's not completely riskless, but CCP sure do seem to be heading that way.

double post

bump him off station with a BC or BS? ;)

Since that is, in fact, how EVE works, yes.

Every ISK you create through Missioning and Incursioning devalues the ISK that everyone else holds.
Every LP you create through Missioning and Incursioning devalues the LP that everyone else holds.
Every Tag you buy to convert your Mission LP is a tag someone else can't use (putting an upwards pressure on tags).
Every Incursion site you win is a site some other fleet didn't win.
Every Roid you mine is a Roid someone else can't mine.
Every Mineral you create through mining devalues the minerals that everyone else holds.

So your PvE activities affect everyone else in the game.

Bumping a Freighter affects 1 person only.
Bumping and Killing a Freighter affects 1 person negatively and everyone else (who owns minerals) positively because:
There is now the demand for 1 new Freighter, increasing the value of the minerals that go into the freighter.
Only downside is that it once again reduces the value of everyone else's ISK by creating a bunch of ISK (insurance).

The "problem" being discussed is bumping that leads to a ship loss. If it didn't and people were just bumping Freighters for the hell of it, the proper response is to file a petition under Griefing (bumping freighters with no aim other than delay is one of the only examples of actual CCP defined griefing possible in current game mechanics).

What's your alternative suggestion to current bumping mechanics?

Removing them means that station games become effectively unstoppable and JFs become effectively invulnerable (I mean more than they are now).
Adding Damage means that Jita's undock becomes one massive explosion.
Adding some Aggression flag runs into the sticky question of who gets the flag.

Oh, and the suggestion that there's no cheap counter is ridiculous in the context of bumping being used to gank Freighters. Make 2 trips is the cheap counter.

If the Bumping of the Freighter doesn't result in a gank, it most likely falls under the griefing rules. So it's not a "problem" for anyone unless they lose their ship (in which case it's a valid tactic).

If you're talking about realism, Well...
Space is a Viscous Liquid
Ships have Top Speeds instead of Top Accelerations
Turrets deliver their damage instantaneously
Faster than Light Sonar that can't tell how far away things are (d-scan)
Grid-Fu
etc.

Your suggestion was what, change the bump mechanics from momentum=mass*velocity to momentum=volume*velocity? Seriously?
Because Mass is already taken into account (that's why Bump Machs and Bump SFIs are used instead of Bump Frigates).


Oh, and since there are laughably few freighter ganks that don't have an expected profit, taking 2 trips is absolutely a counter to bumping that leads to being ganked (GM action is the counter to bumping freighters that aren't going to be ganked).


As for the other uses of bumping, it's how you stop gate crashing, how you stop station games, Titans from getting back into their POS shields, etc. Why should those people be able to do their thing without any fear?

a) Then that's an entirely different problem than the bump mechanics (in my experience, "Stuck" petitions get answered pretty quickly)
b) And? Are you saying that frigates should have no effect on bigger ships?
c) It's bumping people to keep them from returning to their shields. Titans have such huge buffers that without effective bumping, they'd almost universally be ble to get back under POS shields from a fairly large distance, rendering them extraordinarily hard to kill when in the neighborhood of a friendly POS (they're immune to Webs, y'see). Bumping means that poking your head out to take pot shots comes at some risk.
d) Currently bumping takes into account mass, velocity, and elasticity. Collisions in real physics are calculated with mass, velocity, and elasticity. Seems pretty realistic to me.

The thing that may make it look unrealistic is that a Charon only has some 15 times the mass of a good bump SFI, while the SFI is moving some 200 times the speed of the Charon. The SFI has something like 13 times the momentum that the Charon does.
A bump slasher that I just threw together has about 1/100th of the mass of a Charon, but is going more than 100 times as fast, so it has roughly the same momentum as the Charon.

The reason it looks unrealistic to you is that you're ignoring the velocity part of the equation (and possibly the fact that MWDs add mass (and possibly that ship model volume and ship mass aren't well correlated*)).

*See the Machariel, which is about the size of most Carriers, but has a mass more similar to that of a BC.

It would just be odd if you could pass through every ship you came across. There are a lot of reasons to bump people, least of all is the griefing.


What really should be done is CCP getting collision damage into the game.


ORCA TO RAMMING SPEED!

I call undock queue!

How about a module that deals damage to a ship that rams you proportionate to it's inertia? Or, perhaps a module so when rammed, that person's propulsion systems are disabled for a period of time (passive stasis webifier?).

If it you made it so there were small, medium, and large modules that took up a large amount of powergrid/cpu, you wouldn't see the module used in PvP (so that tactic would still be useful), yet it would still be useful as an anti-griefing module.

Any reason(s) that can't/shouldn't be done?