These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Bumping Miners - A Solution

First post First post
Author
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#21 - 2012-10-31 10:29:10 UTC
I have a miner, I don't mine AFK. I might not spend every second staring at my screen, but then again I don't do that in combat missions either, I come read the forums while things like my drones chase down a bunch of frigates that can't break my tank but I can't otherwise kill. Or read web comics in 30 second bursts.

However, not being AFK is not a solution to bumping. A bumper can bump an at keyboard miner at whim, and if they are good at bumping, can bump the miner every time they try and warp if they really want to, preventing the miner from even warping out. (See Freighter ganking for the ultimate use of this mechanic, disrupt warp, suicide gank in 5-15 seconds, defenders don't get time to shoot back before concord is involved anyway even if they exist.)

That said, meh, go on, bump me, it's not going to ruin my day, I'm not going to pay a fee, and I'm not going to put tears out. If you spend an hour bumping me when I try and warp out, then I might report for harrasment, since you aren't even letting me leave, even though me leaving is a win already, but that's really about it.
Legion40k
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-10-31 11:25:47 UTC
ok so bumping is annoying but i found a way around it pretty easily (at least for the Skiff) - strap an afterburner to it. I can orbit most rocks at 500m/s+ and you can fit a disruptor if youre feeling bored Twisted

vroooooom
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2012-10-31 13:26:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Oh bumping is so nice!

I used it once in a guy that was unanchoring a pos in hi-sec after my corp war-dec his ( before the war starts to prevent a bash ) ... in the last 10 seconds of unnanchoring I used a BS to bump him really far from the CT and a friend scoped it!

It worth about 400mi and allot of tears for him.... totally payed the war costs with some profit!!!

to avoid getting bumped set orbit distance to 1000m on the asteroid... your ship will correct the orbit on every bump and it will be really hard for the bumper to get btween you and the asteroid.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#24 - 2012-10-31 14:05:20 UTC
A module isn't the answer. Just apply CCP's new outlook in everything to it. Actions have consequences. Anyone bumping a neutral party (not a fellow corp/alliance member or war target) in highsec or lowsec loses some security status.

I don't think it necessary for a bump to pull aggression, but there does need to be a comeback. You can't even put a bounty on a bumper most times as their sec status is too high.
Cadesc
Exotic Dancers Union
#25 - 2012-10-31 14:12:27 UTC
I actually enjoy watching my mining ship getting bumped.
It's hilarious watching them work so hard, bumping my ship away from the belt. The only thing I have to do is, give a warp to command. After a while my ship will warp off. This may repeat for a while…
The point is they need to be active when they bump you, you don’t. If you pay them you’re just stupid…
If they have to bump you like forever, it’s a huge waste of time for them. Meanwhile you can enjoy watching them, a movie or whatever.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#26 - 2012-10-31 14:57:20 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
Oh bumping is so nice!

I used it once in a guy that was unanchoring a pos in hi-sec after my corp war-dec his ( before the war starts to prevent a bash ) ... in the last 10 seconds of unnanchoring I used a BS to bump him really far from the CT and a friend scoped it!

It worth about 400mi and allot of tears for him.... totally payed the war costs with some profit!!!

to avoid getting bumped set orbit distance to 1000m on the asteroid... your ship will correct the orbit on every bump and it will be really hard for the bumper to get btween you and the asteroid.

You just solved the issue.
Considering how obvious this is, I am curious why they did not think of this on their own.

I think they were hoping if they asked nicely, the mean bumpers would stop.
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#27 - 2012-10-31 15:19:09 UTC
But *everyone knows* that if someone does something that annoys you the right thing to do (TM) is to go whining to the forums for CCP to change the rules so they can't anymore.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs

Jin alPatar
Entertainment 7wenty
The Burning Contingent Alliance
#28 - 2012-10-31 15:32:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Jin alPatar
(preface: I'm pro bumping; anti-extortion)


If we're going to 'solve a problem' it needs to make sense. Anchoring to avoid a game mechanic doesn't make sense. That's like trying to 'solve' the problem of plex being destroyed in the cargohold of pewed ships.


But here's something we could do that would 'solve' the problem: Give mining barges a deployed mode. It increases mining laser yield, lasts for 10 min at a time (during which a ship is unmovable). But here's the kicker, EHP decreases while deployed as a ship is effectively opening itself up to increase yield.

So the advantage is you can't be bumped AND you get increased yield. But now EHP is half what it was making it easier to get ganked.

It's simple and everyone has a choice of what to do.
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-11-01 13:28:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Keko Khaan
Nanatoa wrote:
Your use of the words "a solution" implies there is a problem. Is there really? You seem to imply there is no counter, but isn't there a simple counter already? DON'T BE AFK MINING. All this "we need a counter-module so we can continue to afk-mine in peace" is making me sick. Miners do not even pretend they're playing the game, no, instead they rather petition the game creators to give them the means to continue not playing their game. How do you even come up with such nonsense?!



OFC they play the game. Mining is just so boring that no one with brains cant stare asteroid for 5 hrs in row and feel happy. Heck why would they even stare that rock? Theres nothing going to happen to that rock before its mined out. They are mining because they hate PVE but they are forced to grind ISK to buy ships so they can actually play the game. PVE is something everyone HAS to do to get ISK to play the game. Miners in high sec are usually semi afk and for that they get alot less minerals which they still have to process, haul and sell. Now stop whining you have an option to go semi and afk mine in high sec yourself if your so jealous to them.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-11-01 13:44:54 UTC
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:
Why do people always demand new modules to mitigate a game mechanic?


Because they're too lazy to change their play style.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.

JP Nakamura
Union of Intergalactic Miners and Nano Assemblers
#31 - 2012-11-01 14:02:47 UTC
Jin alPatar wrote:
(preface: I'm pro bumping; anti-extortion)


If we're going to 'solve a problem' it needs to make sense. Anchoring to avoid a game mechanic doesn't make sense. That's like trying to 'solve' the problem of plex being destroyed in the cargohold of pewed ships.


But here's something we could do that would 'solve' the problem: Give mining barges a deployed mode. It increases mining laser yield, lasts for 10 min at a time (during which a ship is unmovable). But here's the kicker, EHP decreases while deployed as a ship is effectively opening itself up to increase yield.

So the advantage is you can't be bumped AND you get increased yield. But now EHP is half what it was making it easier to get ganked.

It's simple and everyone has a choice of what to do.



Disclaimer: I run a miner sometimes, do not mine AFK (although I may watch TV while mining), and usually tank my barges/exhumers.

Most miners are either bots, or not interested in compromise, especially High-Sec miners.

They are in High-Sec because they don't want PvP or the risk of destruction.

Giving them a deploy mode just means that they'll all be sitting fat, dumb, and stupid, when the next Hulk-a-gedon starts and blows away a whole Ice-mining field of ships ...

... actually, on second thought, I'm all in favor of this idea. Let the dumb miners die, the rest of us will get better prices.

CCP: 10+ years of Harvesting players Tears  (latest efforts being Source Limited Edition, and Alliance Logo Revised Policies)

Chaos Transcension
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-11-01 19:00:19 UTC
ugh.. bumping mining. I don't mine in empire so I don't know what this QQ-fest is all about, all I do know is that since the beginning of time (in multi-player videogames) players always run off to beat down the weak or "sissy" types, like ganking the healer, or giving a quick and easy whack to a low tier/level NPC or player.

You want CCP to "fix" this issue?
Repeated bumps will flag someone HOopsSTILE to your corp as though they looted your jettison can. Then be in a corporation with a CTwistedMBAT pilot in the system to blow them to hell. ArrowProblem Solved.

Even in the real world (as in not space ship internet stuff) folks who are harassed and retaliate for once in their life and take a swing, sometimes are let off the hook (refer to youtube videos) and these incidents are often caught on camera, police in many situations get involved, but nothing happens to the person who retaliates.

This is a common sense solution. It does not change game mechanics like this anchoring garbage or asteroid moving crap or whatever.

IdeaBump Someone repeatedly (3+ times in 30 minutes, get flagged to be shot at by that person's corporation. This should not be difficult to code into a patch. (This will be effective on all ships in all circumstances except 0.0/wh. The aggression icon specifically for bumping can be disabled in overview options.)

- Chaos.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#33 - 2012-11-01 20:31:12 UTC
Long post, bear with me, its worth it.

I think there are several issues here that could do with being addressed:

Bear The Miners (AFK or otherwise) feel they are victims of persecution by various gankers and bumpers. They are. But this is decidely a predator and prey deal. Miners are vulnerable and are therefore prey. But they have the right to play EVE the way they want to, free from predation.

Pirate The Gankers/Bumpers are a collection (for the most part) of individuals who are irritated by the fact that miners (or at least ice miners) can rake in isk while not even paying attention. Therefore, they feel they need to do something about this. Why should miners have it so easy? This normaly manifests itself in either extortion or destruction. But they have the right to play EVE the way they want to, free to pursue...

...wait a minute... Both have the right to play their own way... How does that work then?

The answer is, it doesn't. EVE is a game that thrives on emergent game play and thats one of its most unique and interesting features.But at least we all agree on one thing; we all hate the bots, be they miners or misson runners.

So, get the bumpers and gankers off the back of the miners and the miners are happy. Stop the miners from mining afk and the gankers/bumpers are happy. Get rid of the bots and were all happy.

The solution; CHANGE HOW MINING WORKS!

I don't have a problem with this form of high sec piracy. Nor do I condone it. This is EVE and we can all do what we want. So we do. I'm not a full on carebear, nor am I a 1337 PVP'er. I've been playing for about a year and I'm still trying out different aspects of the game. In time I want to work my way through everything it has to offer.

But ice mining is BORING! Why would anyone want to pay attention to a floating peice of ice that isn't going to expire any time soon for the best part of an hour? Why should they when they dont have to?

So, I propose a two part fix:

Gankers already have the downside of losing alot of security rating when they gank a ship. This is also made all the more difficult to accomplish now with the mining barge and exhumer buff with Inferno. But its not impossible, just not as ridiculously easy. From my opinion, thats fairly balanced. No fix needed.

Bumpers, at this time, seem to have all the benefits and none of the drawbacks. There is absolutly no risk in thier current activities. Meanwhile, miners have to either give up what they are doing when a bumper decends upon them or bend to the will of said bumper, hoping they are will keep their word after paying the extortion fee. You can't even wardec the vast majority of them as they purposely hide in NPC corps. You can out bounties on them because they have too high a security rating. So, we even the field a bit. Aggression flagging seems a bit excessive, but make each bump on a ship in high sec or low sec, (not belonging to a fellow corp, alliance or fleet member or a war target,) result in the loss of a small portion of security status. Extortion is a form of piracy, so lets treat it as such. This way, a bumper who spends all day bumping ships and extroting money from his prey will have to spend a long while missioning or ratting to build up his precious security rating, to prevent themselves from becoming viable bounty targets.

Miners can make alot of isk for no real effort. A lone miner in a Mackinaw can currently mine Ice to the value of about 5 million isk an hour. Lets say they do so for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, for a month. So, in the same amount of time that the avergae person works, thats 40 million isk a day, and over 800 million isk in a month. Thats enough to run the account on plex with a few hundred million left over. The same person could make alot more from belt ratting or running level 4's, or even mining ore for that matter. But they dont have to do anything, other than dock up, unload, undock, warp to the ice, target and hit the lasers roughly once an hour. That sucks. So, lets change that. Lets say that a miner has to 'optimise' his lasers every so often, say every 10 to 30 seconds, by doing something in a mining interface, (perhaps something simlar to placing extractors in PI.) Lets say an optimised laser pulls 10% above the normal maximum yield, that encourages miners to pay attention to what they are doing. Lets say lasers that are not optimised lose yield, all the way down to 25% of maximum. Now if thats not going to discourage afk mining then I dont know what is. It should also sting the BOT's as there shouldn't be a way for them to work the optimisation. That should also make them alot more obvious to spot. (I would also guess the price of minerals, ice and fuel would increase, meaning that the prices of everyhting would go up, which seems to be another issue that many bumpers have!)

TL;DR
Pirate Bumpers should lose security status for aggressive bumping.
Bear Make active mining more profitable and afk mining less profitable.
Cool Also, make Mining in general more interesting.
Twisted BURN BOTTER SCUM

I think that should satisfy everyone.
Warp Planet6
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2012-11-01 20:38:16 UTC
F'elch wrote:
[...] anti-miner activity [...]


aka PVP?
Chaos Transcension
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2012-11-01 21:30:45 UTC
@Hakan MacTrew

The only things that need to be changed in mining are few:
New asteroids tiers (15%, 25%, 50% bonus refinery) that are half as rare as a faction spawn and low-end hidden belts in a leveled up indy sov in 0.0, not something that spawns often, but at least once a week (and I don't just mean veldspar)

As far as this bumping stuff goes, I very much like my idea of making those players become aggressed after 3 bumps in the course of 30 minutes, allowing the corporation to shoot the bumpers after that third bump. Or the first bump, if that bump pushes the ship further away than its own signature radius will mark that harasser to be shot at for the standard allotted time.

Fact: Miners get shafted on all corners until they reach a payment:
1. They need to find an adequate location to mine and a position in that belt to stay still for a very long time.
2. They need a ship to mine with, often 30mil to 250mil (fit and rigged, drones, crystals)
3a. They need a hauler. (that can keep up with the mining party)
3b. They can use someone to boost them, an Orca / Rorqual, which in itself is its own nightmare for an account.
4. They need a good refinery situation. (standing or an upgraded 0.0 station with a low tax)
5. They need a secure hauler to bring the goods to a system to sell. Often across a region in a Freighter, Transport Ship, or across the Galaxy in a Jump Freighter that requires multiple accounts of cyno alts, basic intel, and nasty high risk.
6. They eventually learn that they need someone with trade skills to set up a Sell Order in a manufacturing cluster and watch over the days or weeks, their efforts finally pay off.
7. At every interval they are wasting time and money and risking severe loss at any point. All of this in order for the manufacturers of this game to produce the very ship they are being bumped with, or originally; ganked with.

Make the bumpers turn hostile so the non-botters can respond in kind with a pvp alt/friend within the corp as my previous post suggested. All of this nonsense about changing the entire functionality of mining, making some game changing module, reworking how the entire game works because of a few isolated instances, they are all inadequate ideas, but I am at least glad to see some folks are posting something
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#36 - 2012-11-02 01:40:06 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
make each bump on a ship in high sec or low sec, (not belonging to a fellow corp, alliance or fleet member or a war target,) result in the loss of a small portion of security status



*undocks in jita*

*hits -10 immediatley*
JP Nakamura
Union of Intergalactic Miners and Nano Assemblers
#37 - 2012-11-02 02:06:14 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
make each bump on a ship in high sec or low sec, (not belonging to a fellow corp, alliance or fleet member or a war target,) result in the loss of a small portion of security status



*undocks in jita*

*hits -10 immediatley*


Attacked and ganked by CONCORD. Pirate

CCP: 10+ years of Harvesting players Tears  (latest efforts being Source Limited Edition, and Alliance Logo Revised Policies)

Angeal MacNova
Holefood Inc.
Warriors of the Blood God
#38 - 2012-11-02 04:53:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Angeal MacNova
Two things.

1. When it comes to bumping, there should be a mass threshold. If the difference in mass between two ships is great enough, the ship with the greater mass doesn't move while the ship with the lesser mass is the one that is 'bounced'.

2. Keep at range, should always keep you at that range. If you get bumped, your ship should make the attempt to get back into range. Unless this is how it works already in which case, disregard.

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/goodnight-sweet-prince/

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/the-untold-story/

CCP's true, butthurt, colors.

Because those who can't do themselves keep others from doing too.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#39 - 2012-11-02 08:52:32 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
A module isn't the answer. Just apply CCP's new outlook in everything to it. Actions have consequences. Anyone bumping a neutral party (not a fellow corp/alliance member or war target) in highsec or lowsec loses some security status.

I don't think it necessary for a bump to pull aggression, but there does need to be a comeback. You can't even put a bounty on a bumper most times as their sec status is too high.


Undock from jita
instantly -10

stupid idea.

There doesn't need to be any "comeback" for bumping at all
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#40 - 2012-11-02 08:56:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Hakan MacTrew
JP Nakamura wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
make each bump on a ship in high sec or low sec, (not belonging to a fellow corp, alliance or fleet member or a war target,) result in the loss of a small portion of security status



*undocks in jita*

*hits -10 immediatley*


Attacked and ganked by CONCORD. Pirate

Please note I stated 'aggressive bumping'. I suggest anyone 'deliberatly' bumping should suffer the penalty. So using approach, etc would cause it on impact.

(Perhaps a countdown timer after undocking.)