These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP allow miners to defend against bumpers ?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#281 - 2012-10-25 14:12:11 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
But miners keep assuring me that the minerals they mine are free, therefore indicating that their time is worth nothing. Since bumping takes nothing from miners but time, they aren't really losing anything, Q.E.D.

...wut?
.


Thought this was easier to understand. Okay, trying again.

You are not arguing on the side of the rational people in this one. The rational people, including rational miners like I have been, are not subject to the bumping because we do not mine in Halaima anymore.
svenska flicka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#282 - 2012-10-25 14:13:41 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
svenska flicka wrote:
TharOkha wrote:
Okay, usualy i defend miners (especialy in buffed-barge-whine case). But in this case... OMG... Roll Do you know that you can orbit asteroid in 5-10km? it is realy hard to bump you if you are ...**MOVING**.... Do you see that bumper is approaching you? Set full speed, dodge, and LOL as he miss.



That requires the OP to be at his computer Blink


But it's not fair that they can't go make a sandwhich Cry



I want to make sandwich and eat it watching TV in another room during CTA's but CCP mean to me in mah sansbox X
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#283 - 2012-10-25 14:13:52 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
But miners keep assuring me that the minerals they mine are free, therefore indicating that their time is worth nothing. Since bumping takes nothing from miners but time, they aren't really losing anything, Q.E.D.

...wut?
.


Thought this was easier to understand. Okay, trying again.

You are not arguing on the side of the rational people in this one. The rational people, including rational miners like I have been, are not subject to the bumping because we do not mine in Halaima anymore.


Ah. Sorry. The thing is though, while you're right yes, they've moved and expanded their efforts. That is the concern. If it was in one system...they're still assholes, but fine. When it expands and multiple systems are being affected...no.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#284 - 2012-10-25 14:13:59 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
Thought this was easier to understand. Okay, trying again.

You are not arguing on the side of the rational people in this one. The rational people, including rational miners like I have been, are not subject to the bumping because we do not mine in Halaima anymore.


it's almost as if there aren't enough dudes bumping miners to cover every hisec system where one can mine

a shocking thought, i know

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#285 - 2012-10-25 14:15:31 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Tobiaz wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
James 315 wrote:
In all seriousness though, there are plenty of ways to defend against bumpers. Go mine in low/null and shoot them. Smile


In all seriousness though, no. They don't want to because they don't want to be interrupted in THEIR game play style. Whether shooting or bumping. Your logic is wrong. Smile


So is your argument.

"If I go into 0.0 people try to blow me up! They are interrupting MY play style! CCP, do something about it!"

Empire is no different, in being entitled ONLY to what you can enforce. In high-sec the odds are simply more in favor of the carebears, but by no means perfect. THIS IS HOW IT WAS DESIGNED FROM DAY ONE

You are also wrong in your assessment of AFK miners 'just minding their own business'. Their actions (or 'in-action' if you will), have a big impact on the market for ice, making it almost impossible for active miners to compete. Ever thought of that?


That would be a good argument if they ONLY bumped afks and botters. I've seen the bump everyone, afk or not. All Miners, active or inactive are subject to their little crusade.



Deal with it. Half the time the miner players are glad for something to do besides wait for the next wave of rats to show up. I've seen active miners tell the bumpers which ships out there are AFK or probable bots, too. Hell, now I'm seeing miners bumping other miners for the lolz.

And there are numerous counters to bumping, just ask anybody who escorts freighters at a gate.

This whole thread is ridiculous; if you are seriously asking CCP to ban somebody for bumping other ships then you need to go play Star Trek Online or something; there are thousands of players that gank miners hourly, even with the recent rebalance, how come you aren't asking for them to be banned as well?

How come you aren't complaining about stupid bumping games at station undocks, or ambush bumping to make sure a target can't dock up into a station and avoid a gank?

tldr; OP is mad, bro.

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#286 - 2012-10-25 14:17:59 UTC
15 pages of this crap.

Will one of you Devs lock the damn topic already?

It's impacting my play style and I'm a paying customer.

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#287 - 2012-10-25 14:20:00 UTC
Mike Adoulin wrote:


This whole thread is ridiculous; if you are seriously asking CCP to ban somebody for bumping other ships then you need to go play Star Trek Online or something; there are thousands of players that gank miners hourly, even with the recent rebalance, how come you aren't asking for them to be banned as well?

How come you aren't complaining about stupid bumping games at station undocks, or ambush bumping to make sure a target can't dock up into a station and avoid a gank?

tldr; OP is mad, bro.


Where did the OP say anything about banning? He wants a defense mechanism to use against them, not a ban hammer you half wit.
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#288 - 2012-10-25 14:21:40 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Mike Adoulin wrote:


This whole thread is ridiculous; if you are seriously asking CCP to ban somebody for bumping other ships then you need to go play Star Trek Online or something; there are thousands of players that gank miners hourly, even with the recent rebalance, how come you aren't asking for them to be banned as well?

How come you aren't complaining about stupid bumping games at station undocks, or ambush bumping to make sure a target can't dock up into a station and avoid a gank?

tldr; OP is mad, bro.


Where did the OP say anything about banning? He wants a defense mechanism to use against them, not a ban hammer you half wit.


Define a defense mechanism against miner bumping that wouldn't make Jita 4-4 the most hilarious place in New Eden.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#289 - 2012-10-25 14:21:50 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Ah. Sorry. The thing is though, while you're right yes, they've moved and expanded their efforts. That is the concern. If it was in one system...they're still assholes, but fine. When it expands and multiple systems are being affected...no.
When it expands and multiple systems are being affected, there will be fewer on the ground so the chance of the rational miner being affected approaches zero.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#290 - 2012-10-25 14:23:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Ah. Sorry. The thing is though, while you're right yes, they've moved and expanded their efforts. That is the concern. If it was in one system...they're still assholes, but fine. When it expands and multiple systems are being affected...no.
When it expands and multiple systems are being affected, there will be fewer on the ground so the chance of the rational miner being affected approaches zero.


If their current numbers remain steady this is true and you are 100% correct. However, the bandwagon is getting bigger based off forum sentiment of some other players. What is your prediction of their numbers should this positive sentiment trend continue?

Do you foresee this as becoming a full fledged thing that's here to stay, or a passing fad?
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#291 - 2012-10-25 14:26:05 UTC
This is the natural eco-system of New Eden. Interference will have consequences you did not intend. Still curious as to how you think you're going to interfere though.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#292 - 2012-10-25 14:27:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
If their current numbers remain steady this is true and you are 100% correct. However, the bandwagon is getting bigger based off forum sentiment of some other players. What is your prediction of their numbers should this positive sentiment trend continue?
Rational miners become (relatively) more numerous; finding targets become harder; people get bored. End result: the chance of a rational miner being affected is zero.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#293 - 2012-10-25 14:28:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
If their current numbers remain steady this is true and you are 100% correct. However, the bandwagon is getting bigger based off forum sentiment of some other players. What is your prediction of their numbers should this positive sentiment trend continue?
Rational miners become more numerous; finding targets become harder; people get bored. End result: the chance of a rational miner being affected is zero.


I'll be honest, if you say it's a passing thing then who am I to argue? Thanks for the input!
svenska flicka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#294 - 2012-10-25 14:29:17 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Ah. Sorry. The thing is though, while you're right yes, they've moved and expanded their efforts. That is the concern. If it was in one system...they're still assholes, but fine. When it expands and multiple systems are being affected...no.
When it expands and multiple systems are being affected, there will be fewer on the ground so the chance of the rational miner being affected approaches zero.


If their current numbers remain steady this is true and you are 100% correct. However, the bandwagon is getting bigger based off forum sentiment of some other players. What is your prediction of their numbers should this positive sentiment trend continue?

Do you foresee this as becoming a full fledged thing that's here to stay, or a passing fad?



You have not played eve for long obviously.

Oh and if you didn't know, goons did not invent highsec ganking this year either.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#295 - 2012-10-25 14:30:22 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Andski wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
It doesn't help. Why would more expensive losses equate to more meaningful to everyone? It just means people would be MORE risk averse you twit. You raise the barrier of entry, they dont want to risk loosing the ship, they end up not playing OR paying, subscriptions go down, and gg Eve. GG free expansions, GG more content, expanding company, more gameplay, more fixed, more ANYTHING.


because an erebus hull, which represents ~40,000 max-yield hulk hours of veldspar mining for the trit requirements alone, being so easily replaced, is somehow good for the game?


Would you remember what I said about barrier of entry? I don't care about your NAP alliances. I care about the new people coming in and trying to build up. You build whatever the hell you want, I just don't want to see Jonny Newbie play three weeks, find it impossible to afford a damn cruiser, and then quit.


This argument could just as well be used against the proliferation of mining scum - for example, Johnny Newbie starts playing and like many first time players he turns to mining as an initial activity, but what he mines is worth absolutely nothing because the mining filth have caused all the prices to tank.

See how that works?
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#296 - 2012-10-25 14:32:54 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

This argument could just as well be used against the proliferation of mining scum - for example, Johnny Newbie starts playing and like many first time players he turns to mining as an initial activity, but what he mines is worth absolutely nothing because the mining filth have caused all the prices to tank.

See how that works?


So try the reserve then. He makes what is presumed to be a lot of isk from mining. Good for him! But his isk is maybe 1/10 the price of a new ship, even after a week of mining.

See how that works?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#297 - 2012-10-25 14:33:12 UTC
…and anyway, if the number of bumpers is increasing, it's only because the bumpees sell its entertainment value so well.
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#298 - 2012-10-25 14:37:44 UTC
Tali Ambrelle, what would you do to stop miner bumping? What game mechanic would you change?
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#299 - 2012-10-25 14:38:04 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

This argument could just as well be used against the proliferation of mining scum - for example, Johnny Newbie starts playing and like many first time players he turns to mining as an initial activity, but what he mines is worth absolutely nothing because the mining filth have caused all the prices to tank.

See how that works?


So try the reserve then. He makes what is presumed to be a lot of isk from mining. Good for him! But his isk is maybe 1/10 the price of a new ship, even after a week of mining.

See how that works?


If bots, afks and miners in general are being interdicted though then the prices of minerals will rise, which is good for Johnny Newbie.

If bots, afks and miners in general are given even more protection the prices of minerals drop, which is bad for Johnny Newbie if he wants to join the ranks of filthy miners.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#300 - 2012-10-25 14:42:27 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
Tali Ambrelle, what would you do to stop miner bumping? What game mechanic would you change?

I have no idea, it's not my job. I express my disapproval, I don't claim to know how to run a game. Collision mechanics won't work as that's far too exploitable. Concording or banning them is laughably un-Eve. Aside from the duct tape solutions that might work for now, I couldn't come up with an answer. Could you? Aside from letting them continue to bump?

TheGunslinger42 wrote:

If bots, afks and miners in general are being interdicted though then the prices of minerals will rise, which is good for Johnny Newbie.

Except that the ship prices will also continue to rise even higher. Same with modules.

TheGunslinger42 wrote:
If bots, afks and miners in general are given even more protection the prices of minerals drop, which is bad for Johnny Newbie if he wants to join the ranks of filthy miners.

So now you're trying to spin this as a defense for the "filthy miners?" To ensure they can continue?...right...