These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

space anchor

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Marvin Narville
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2012-10-25 18:20:53 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Marvin Narville wrote:
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Bumping because this is (except for the above troll suggestion) a good idea.


Oh, I see you've joined in on the bumper griefing as well! Seems to me we have a pot calling the kettle black situation, which i suppose would make you a racist as well sir! X

I propose we implement some sort of "forum anchor" to combat this nefarious forum bumping campaign being perpetrated by Tali and her minions. Perhaps it could add mass(ive) walls of text to your forum signature radius, so large that it limits each page to a single post! We could call it a 1600mm reinforced rolled texten plate, and balance it by having it also prevent you from using the smiley face icons for 10, or perhaps even 20 minutes, while also reducing your tin foil hat resistances by 25%.

Lets take a stand against Tali and these forum bumpers!


wut


There you go again! GAH! I'll have you know that as a subscribing player, I have bought and earned my right to post on these forums and you have no right to continue your campaign of forum bumping the threads I post in. I am entitled to the right to post in a thread, and then promptly afk, and I should be able to do so with the reasonable expectation that you will not assault me with your incessant forum bumping exploitz! If I want a reply I shall specifically request one! Next you'll tell me you consider it to be "emergent forum posting" or some nonsense. You sir are a belligerent and undesirable forum griefer.

Don't think playing coy by saying "wut" will save you either. I happen to be logging all of these posts, and fully intend to submit this forum post log on the forums for the devs attention! "The New General Discussion Code of Conduct" you espouse is arbitrary and i'll not be cowed by it, I demand justice sir!

I am sick of this non-consensual interaction on the forums!
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-10-25 18:25:14 UTC
Marvin Narville wrote:

There you go again! GAH! I'll have you know that as a subscribing player, I have bought and earned my right to post on these forums and you have no right to continue your campaign of forum bumping the threads I post in. I am entitled to the right to post in a thread, and then promptly afk, and I should be able to do so with the reasonable expectation that you will not assault me with your incessant forum bumping exploitz! If I want a reply I shall specifically request one! Next you'll tell me you consider it to be "emergent forum posting" or some nonsense. You sir are a belligerent and undesirable forum griefer.

Don't think playing coy by saying "wut" will save you either. I happen to be logging all of these posts, and fully intend to submit this forum post log on the forums for the devs attention! "The New General Discussion Code of Conduct" you espouse is arbitrary and i'll not be cowed by it, I demand justice sir!

I am sick of this non-consensual interaction on the forums!


I like you. I like you a lot.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#63 - 2012-10-25 18:54:06 UTC
Make it a low slot mod. Make it use heavy water. Take up more of that cargo space on Miners Twisted And I would be all for it.
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
#64 - 2012-10-25 19:07:25 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Do you actually believe there shouldnt be a way to defend against it? A module, or a skill of some sort, that at least reduces the speed at which you get bumped away


The proper way to handle this would be for CCP to actually program ship collisions that cause damage. As it is now bumpers lose nothing from their actions and miners lose everything. See what happens when the bumpers start incurring replacement and repair costs...
Doddy
Excidium.
#65 - 2012-10-25 19:09:36 UTC
To be honest a space anchor that stopped you getting bumped but made you be stuck there when the gankers came calling (like a sort of seige mode) would be quite balanced and fair.
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2012-10-25 19:15:28 UTC
Shizuken wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Do you actually believe there shouldnt be a way to defend against it? A module, or a skill of some sort, that at least reduces the speed at which you get bumped away


The proper way to handle this would be for CCP to actually program ship collisions that cause damage. As it is now bumpers lose nothing from their actions and miners lose everything. See what happens when the bumpers start incurring replacement and repair costs...

And then Jita 4-4 dies.
Nanatoa
#67 - 2012-10-25 22:46:04 UTC
Tali Ambraelle wrote:
Shizuken wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Do you actually believe there shouldnt be a way to defend against it? A module, or a skill of some sort, that at least reduces the speed at which you get bumped away


The proper way to handle this would be for CCP to actually program ship collisions that cause damage. As it is now bumpers lose nothing from their actions and miners lose everything. See what happens when the bumpers start incurring replacement and repair costs...

And then Jita 4-4 dies.

Excellent!

"Stay the course, we have done this many times before." - (CCP) Hilmar, June 2011
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#68 - 2012-10-26 00:10:35 UTC
Ballast tank: an item that has very high weight/volume ratio.

When put in your cargo hold it effects the weight of your ship, reducing the effect from bumping, but also your ships agility.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#69 - 2012-10-26 12:17:07 UTC
Ten Bulls wrote:
Ballast tank: an item that has very high weight/volume ratio.

When put in your cargo hold it effects the weight of your ship, reducing the effect from bumping, but also your ships agility.



First of all im not sure Ballast exists in space. And wouldnt the bumpers be able to take advantage of it, effectually canceling out the effect

o/
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#70 - 2012-10-26 12:37:25 UTC
Wait next expansion, ganking got a huge buff. Will become very profitable again

brb
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-10-26 12:38:48 UTC
Bumping an anti-bumper thread. Anchors ftw.

BTW James, I saw your posts. Please, please put a bounty on me you undesirable belligerents.

Really, please do.
Jasper Dark
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#72 - 2012-10-26 12:41:14 UTC
Souisa wrote:
How can you defend against it?


Dont be AFK!
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2012-10-26 12:42:19 UTC
Jasper Dark wrote:
Souisa wrote:
How can you defend against it?


Dont be AFK!


Doesn't matter. They still bump at keyboard miners. They're once "holy" crusade has turned into an extortion scam.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#74 - 2012-10-26 12:43:41 UTC
Even if you werent afk bumping is considered griefing from the victims perspective, there should be a way to defend against it. For example a module that fits into a low slot that reduces your vulnerability to bumping

o/
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2012-10-26 12:44:58 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Even if you werent afk bumping is considering griefing from the victims perspective, there should be a way to defend against it. For example a module that fits into a low slot that reduces your vulnerability to bumping


IE the anchor that been discussed. And I agree with you. If these people had kept to bumping bots and actual people afk for 24 hours at a time, I wouldn't be so against this.

But bumping active miners, miners away for 1 or 2 hours, I don't accept.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#76 - 2012-10-26 12:46:34 UTC
Well clearly there is a problem and clearly there is no defence against it, i only think it would be reasnoable not to nerf bumping or remove it from the game, but to give players a choice to "fit against it"

o/
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2012-10-26 12:49:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Tali Ambraelle
Souisa wrote:
Well clearly there is a problem and clearly there is no defence against it, i only think it would be reasnoable not to nerf bumping or remove it from the game, but to give players a choice to "fit against it"


And I concur. If there was a way to do it, I'd tell you lot to just fight back. Bears have teeth, you know Blink

But since there isn't, these belligerent undesirables need reeling in.

Edit: I wonder if people would pay for James315's corpse? Or the corpses of others from their group? :|...
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#78 - 2012-10-26 13:04:39 UTC
I dont have anything against james or anyone else that decided to bump or use the game mechanics in a certain way. But i do believe there is a problem, or an unfair advantage, and that people should be able to fit against it

o/
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#79 - 2012-10-30 05:11:37 UTC
MIrple wrote:
Make it a low slot mod. Make it use heavy water. Take up more of that cargo space on Miners Twisted And I would be all for it.


I agree it should be a low slot, however having it require fuel other than cap is crossing a boundary thats not neccesary imo. It overcomplicates things. Besides Barges at least have seperate ore and cargo holds now

o/
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#80 - 2012-10-30 05:17:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
I know of some great space ship games where you can mine your little heart out & not be bothered by other people ever. That is what you want, right.

Souisa wrote:
Even if you werent afk bumping is considered griefing from the victims perspective, there should be a way to defend against it.


There is. It's called 'Purchasing a mining permit".

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.