These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Freighter bumping.....

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lorna Mood
P.I.E.
#1 - 2012-11-19 20:17:22 UTC
.... is this a legitimate use of the game mechanics or is it utilising a game mechanic in a way that it was never designed to be utilised?

Is it concievable that something as big as a freighter can be bumped by a much much smaller ship. Yes I know real life physics don't apply to Eve but still..... Would it not make more sense that in order to bump a ship... any ship... you have to have a bigger mass than it or you simply bump off yourself and your target is unaffected? Would that be so hard to implement?

I'm trying to make this a serious discussion thread about an important game mechanic. Please keep it on topic so that it isn't locked.

Thanks
Lashenadeeka
Qinglong Fleet
Jade Kirin Alliance
#2 - 2012-11-19 20:18:11 UTC
Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.
Lorna Mood
P.I.E.
#3 - 2012-11-19 20:22:27 UTC
Lashenadeeka wrote:
Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.


We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#4 - 2012-11-19 20:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lorna Mood wrote:
.... is this a legitimate use of the game mechanics
According to CCP, yes.
Lorna Mood wrote:
We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.
PSA Flight 182 would like a word with you.

Btw, putting physics back in, an MWD Stabber delivers a neat ~50 TJ jolt when it smacks into something. For reference, the 21 kiloton a-bombs used in WWII delivered 88 TJ.
Sixx Spades
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2012-11-19 20:24:51 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
So, I just spoke to the GM Team regarding this to get some clarification:

Firstly, people who are bumped always have the right to petition. It is the right of any player who feels that they want to petition an issue to do so.

However, with regards to the rules in EVE Online our current view is:


Bumping is not considered harassment.
Bumping is not considered griefing.
Bumping is not against the rules.



It's actually been used for a long time to prevent warping as a rudimentary form of tackling when you don't have a point, or don't have sufficient disruption strength to keep someone pinned.

Along with that, the people that are doing this for the best part are in player corporations. If you don't like what they're doing, declare war on them so that you can punish them, or pay a merc corp to do so on your behalf if you don't want to fight.

There are plenty of options to counter this, if you use your imagination. Smile


Nooooooope, gonna continue bumping. To answer your question, though, it is a legitimate tactic. Feel free to make these threads and continue flying freighters the way you do.

Using a weapon as a deterrent in a diplomatic situation is only viable when you have proven that you have deployed it in the past and are willing to use it in the future.
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-11-19 20:26:33 UTC
MWDs increase mass so a smaller ship is actually very big while MWD burning. Nothing wrong with a specialized fit for a specialized job, that's pretty much the whole point of fitting.

Maybe 4-5 years ago it was fixed so that small ships can't bump larger ones very hard. Try to bump a freighter with a frigate. Go on, try it.
Lorna Mood
P.I.E.
#7 - 2012-11-19 20:29:43 UTC
the important words from CCP Falcon there in the quote that is always used are "current view"

In other words that view can change. That's why it is a legitimate discussion topic.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2012-11-19 20:31:14 UTC
Lorna Mood wrote:
Lashenadeeka wrote:
Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.


We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.


I beg to differ. I have a feeling I could divert a Jumbo Jet quite effectively by flying into it with a Cessna. I can even predict the direction said Jet will go after the "bump".

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.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#9 - 2012-11-19 20:31:30 UTC
Lorna Mood wrote:
Lashenadeeka wrote:
Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.


We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.


True, but neither of those planes have shields. And since we are leaving physics out of it, you can't tell me the physics of shields do not work that way.

The simple truth is, it's allowed. Deal with it.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#10 - 2012-11-19 20:35:23 UTC
Lorna Mood wrote:
the important words from CCP Falcon there in the quote that is always used are "current view"

In other words that view can change. That's why it is a legitimate discussion topic.
Not really, no. CCP Falcon answer the topic fully and completely: yes it is a legitimate use of game mechanics; no it is not utilising that mechanic in a way it wasn't designed for.

What you're looking for is a completely different topic: should the rules or mechanics change, to which the answer is “no, there's no reason to”.
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#11 - 2012-11-19 20:38:49 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
a rudimentary form of tackling


Many carriers and supercaps even titans would be alive today if not for bumping. To be against bumping is to be for supercap proliferation.

.
Lorna Mood
P.I.E.
#12 - 2012-11-19 20:39:04 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Lorna Mood wrote:
[quote=Lashenadeeka]Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.




The simple truth is, it's allowed. Deal with it.


I am dealing with it... by questioning it :) I'm sure there are many good reasons why this works as intended but surely there is another side aswell? That's why it's a debate.

If you think trapping a freighter and getting it stuck thanks to the bump mechanic is that game feature working as intended then nobody is going to change your mind. It's still a legitimate topic for discussion though as some may disagree.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#13 - 2012-11-19 20:45:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Khergit Deserters
Lorna Mood wrote:
Lashenadeeka wrote:
Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.


We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.

Maybe bumping a container freighter ship with a fishing trawler would be a better analogy? Closer to the "floating weightless" and "fluid dynamics physics" model of EVE. If freighters and trawlers could move at high speed, that is.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2012-11-19 20:49:49 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:
a rudimentary form of tackling


Many carriers and supercaps even titans would be alive today if not for bumping. To be against bumping is to be for supercap proliferation.


With real collision, your blob would destroy half of your Titans in the first fleet fight.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#15 - 2012-11-19 20:51:24 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
No More Heroes wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:
a rudimentary form of tackling


Many carriers and supercaps even titans would be alive today if not for bumping. To be against bumping is to be for supercap proliferation.


With real collision, your blob would destroy half of your Titans in the first fleet fight.


Keep at range 2k

.
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#16 - 2012-11-19 20:53:16 UTC
Lorna Mood wrote:
I am dealing with it... by questioning it :) I'm sure there are many good reasons why this works as intended but surely there is another side aswell? That's why it's a debate.

No, there isn't another side. The only reason to remove the ability to bump freighters would be to make highsec safer. However, the idea that highsec should be safer has been debunked and is only a fringe viewpoint now. Serious observers agree that highsec risk:reward is out of balance because there's too much reward for too little risk in highsec. Smile

MinerBumping.com
Ritsum
Perkone
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-11-19 20:53:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ritsum
If it helps remove ISK from the game I am all for it...


~Posting in another bumping thread.

James 315 wrote:
Lorna Mood wrote:
I am dealing with it... by questioning it :) I'm sure there are many good reasons why this works as intended but surely there is another side aswell? That's why it's a debate.

No, there isn't another side. The only reason to remove the ability to bump freighters would be to make highsec safer. However, the idea that highsec should be safer has been debunked and is only a fringe viewpoint now. Serious observers agree that highsec risk:reward is out of balance because there's too much reward for too little risk in highsec. Smile


"Serious observers" being Null baby's who are crying about their own space lacking updates? As I see it the Risk is high in High sec related to how much ISK is involved which these "1337" PvPer's are showing us by ganking those rich people constantly and by doing that all it does is make High sec look like it is in need of a buff, not that I think it needs it.

Play EvE how you want to play it and do not let others dictate how you play. Evolve your playstyle to protect yourself from others! Even in "PVE", "PVP" is there, lurking in the shadows.
XJennieX
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2012-11-19 20:55:19 UTC
freighter holding at place and then landing suicidegankers on it for a kill is not something that should be doable in hisec. time for a change. yes we can.
Jiska Ensa
Estrale Frontiers
#19 - 2012-11-19 20:55:41 UTC
Last time i checked, bumping does follow the laws of momentum. The problem you're describing is that the velocity vector needs to be very close to the warp path for a ship to be "aligned" and even a slight bump at the right angle can throw that off.

Also, a Cessna could, in fact, alter the flight of a jumbo jet quite easily, although it's much more likely the jet would cause the cessna to fall out of the sky. Read up on wing-tip vorticies.

tl;dr bumping is working as intended.
Anslo
Scope Works
#20 - 2012-11-19 20:57:53 UTC
It is a bit ridiculous for a freighter to be bumped significantly by another smaller ship. Can you give an example of a situation for us to comment on, OP? What?

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
123Next pageLast page