These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Miner Bumping: Discussion & Questions Thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#261 - 2012-11-30 17:28:17 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Last post on minerbumping.com is a mini guide what to train and how to fit a nice ganking catalyst. But you know, miners can train for those too. Can you imagine how much propaganda you could spin after suicide ganking bumping crew? But to do it you would need that thing, how is it called? Oh, I know: BALLS!



In the past few months, I've seen one miner fit a competent catalyst and attempt to gank the lesser tanked stabbers roaming the ice fields. She took out 2 of them if I recall correctly(2 out of 2 tries, so 100% success rate), but didn't follow the bumpers on their next move as most of the anti-bumpers posting in this thread do, so I haven't seen her since. This both proves that ganking is a real risk for the bumpers, if any miner were willing to attempt it and spend the 20 minutes fitting a proper catalyst first; and also proves that 99.9% of miners aren't willing to put forth any real effort defending themselves properly.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#262 - 2012-11-30 17:29:08 UTC
Ahvram wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ahvram wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Except it does. They're in highsec doing that because they don't want to PvP. They don't force missioning et al on you, why should you force PvP on them?


You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what highsec is. Highsec does not mean, has never meant, and ideally never will mean pvp-free. It's considerably safer than other areas, but it is not 100% safe. So you're simply wrong - them being in highsec does not mean they are not valid targets for any form of PVP, including bumping.


Last time a checked every action in eve related to PVP there are some cause and effect. You gank concord pops you, You can/wreck flip you get and agression timer. You harass miners/freighters by pushing them around belts/gates you get? You take no risk for full reward.


I think miners should stop inhaling veldspar dust, as it's given them a curious blindness related to the words "suicide", "gank", "war" and "dec"



Sorry bumpers are War dec proof see NPC corp. As for ganking Ya lets see the option. Gank the bumper (Which for a miner is near impossible) you lose more money trying to gank them than you would paying there risk free extorsion money. Thats a win for sure... Its not and answer to the issue at all.

Our option to deal with you requires us to use the pvp system. Your option is to avoid the pvp system and its rules. See how that works. Now if I could gank you without concord interference we would be on the same level.

And be real Miner bumpers dont run around in frigs/destroyers they use Machs and other large gank proof battleships to push miners around belts. Last time I check it takes about 10+ Tornados/talos to gank a buffer tank BS. Thats fair right? Only takes one of you completely avoiding all pvp rules to pvp yet it would take nearly 10 pilots all forced to abide by the pvp system to deal with you.


You have plenty of options available, yet you blatently choose not to use them. Plus, most of your claimed 'facts' on bumping & suicide ganking are completely false.

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.
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#263 - 2012-11-30 17:32:29 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Ahvram wrote:
Would take about 2/3 BC to gank a stabber (if the stabber pilot is worth anything). So 2/3 pilots at around 100 mill EA + sec status loss is = to A stabber and you right back at bumping with all reward no risk and free kill rights. Ya thats balanced.

It always comes back to the victims has to risk much and the bumpers risk nothing. Its nothing but a form of pvp that allows you to dodge pvp mechanics to force other pilots to your will.


You do know that a bumping fit stabber has minimal defensive and offensive capabilities?, you have to nerf the hell out of it to get the oversized MWD on, and if it's taking you 2 or 3 BCs to gank a cruiser, you're doing it wrong, I've seen a single destroyer take down a stabber in the past before concord turned up.



A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#264 - 2012-11-30 17:35:44 UTC


You have plenty of options available, yet you blatently choose not to use them. Plus, most of your claimed 'facts' on bumping & suicide ganking are completely false.

Says a Goon lol. The "Facts" most come from your little forum posts and the bumper blogs. So sad you have ran out of good arguments at this point to defend this pathetic exploit. Again im sure you guys love risk free pvp I mean doing it the right way isnt the goon way after all.
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#265 - 2012-11-30 17:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


Have you personally ship scanned and attempted to gank minerbumping ships? I'm claiming that I've witnessed one (1) single catalyst gank minerbumping stabbers with great success. Have you tried and failed? Perhaps we could help you with your fit/skills? (This serves 2 purposes: first, adds challenge to bumping, second, there's a better than even chance that after you train someone to gank a stabber, he'll realize that afk macks are more deserving of ganks.)
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#266 - 2012-11-30 17:42:37 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


Have you personally ship scanned and attempted to gank bumping ships? I'm claiming that I've witnessed one (1) single catalyst gank bumping stabbers with great success. Have you tried and failed? Perhaps we could help you with your fit/skills?



Ive never stepped foot in and Ice belt and when I do mine I have dealt with bumpers before. Honestly I would not even be in this thread if CCP falcon had not closed the other thread about freighter bumping. Im agaist bumping as a whole seeing as its going to be the only way to stop goons from exploiting freighters for easy kills. I agree with it as a game mechanic and it does have its uses but if it being in game means the goons get free warp scrams on any freighter they single out im all for putting and end to it.

A good mechanic abused by people who need exploits to achieve there goals.
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#267 - 2012-11-30 17:46:47 UTC
Ahvram wrote:
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


Have you personally ship scanned and attempted to gank bumping ships? I'm claiming that I've witnessed one (1) single catalyst gank bumping stabbers with great success. Have you tried and failed? Perhaps we could help you with your fit/skills?



Ive never stepped foot in and Ice belt and when I do mine I have dealt with bumpers before. Honestly I would not even be in this thread if CCP falcon had not closed the other thread about freighter bumping. Im agaist bumping as a whole seeing as its going to be the only way to stop goons from exploiting freighters for easy kills. I agree with it as a game mechanic and it does have its uses but if it being in game means the goons get free warp scrams on any freighter they single out im all for putting and end to it.

A good mechanic abused by people who need exploits to achieve there goals.


You've never stepped foot in an Ice belt before? Why didn't you say so before making 30 posts on bumping miners in ice fields? That completely changes my earlier responses to you, here's their new version:
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#268 - 2012-11-30 17:53:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Ahvram
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


Have you personally ship scanned and attempted to gank bumping ships? I'm claiming that I've witnessed one (1) single catalyst gank bumping stabbers with great success. Have you tried and failed? Perhaps we could help you with your fit/skills?



Ive never stepped foot in and Ice belt and when I do mine I have dealt with bumpers before. Honestly I would not even be in this thread if CCP falcon had not closed the other thread about freighter bumping. Im agaist bumping as a whole seeing as its going to be the only way to stop goons from exploiting freighters for easy kills. I agree with it as a game mechanic and it does have its uses but if it being in game means the goons get free warp scrams on any freighter they single out im all for putting and end to it.

A good mechanic abused by people who need exploits to achieve there goals.


You've never stepped foot in an Ice belt before? Why didn't you say so before making 30 posts on bumping miners in ice fields? That completely changes my earlier responses to you, here's their new version:


Because Miner bumping only happen in ICE belts right? I mean there is no one who goes around bumping the ABC ore miners and demanding ISK?? Your reply is on par with the goon. Empty and pointless

And lets not forget I didnt ask to post here I was forced to post here by CCP.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#269 - 2012-11-30 18:02:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Ahvram wrote:
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


Have you personally ship scanned and attempted to gank bumping ships? I'm claiming that I've witnessed one (1) single catalyst gank bumping stabbers with great success. Have you tried and failed? Perhaps we could help you with your fit/skills?



Ive never stepped foot in and Ice belt and when I do mine I have dealt with bumpers before. Honestly I would not even be in this thread if CCP falcon had not closed the other thread about freighter bumping. Im agaist bumping as a whole seeing as its going to be the only way to stop goons from exploiting freighters for easy kills. I agree with it as a game mechanic and it does have its uses but if it being in game means the goons get free warp scrams on any freighter they single out im all for putting and end to it.

A good mechanic abused by people who need exploits to achieve there goals.



This knife is great, I can also use it as a screwdriver. Please don't take the ability for me to use my thumbs because I used something other than what it was intended for.

Or why not instead of saying "exploit" (because it is NOT an exploit, the freighter can do a double login, which IS an exploit, and from what I've read concerning Goon response to that, most understand the use and don't cry foul) But this is about miners being bumped, not freighters. Your #firstworldproblems don't belong in this thread.

And no, no you aren't being forced to jacksquat. Except pay your mining fee if you enter Code enforced Hisec. Or you risk bump.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#270 - 2012-11-30 18:04:54 UTC
Ahvram wrote:


Because Miner bumping only happen in ICE belts right? I mean there is no one who goes around bumping the ABC ore miners and demanding ISK?? Your reply is on par with the goon. Empty and pointless

And lets not forget I didnt ask to post here I was forced to post here by CCP.


Well, to be honest, yes, I did think there was literally no one going around bumping ABC ore miners and demanding ISK. Are you claiming that there are? If so, do you have proof of this assertion?
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#271 - 2012-11-30 18:06:22 UTC
Ahvram wrote:


A 10mn Stabber does a fine job pushing a mining ship around a belt. You guys are great the defense gets weaker and weaker the more its pulled apart. Why cant you just say "We like to pvp without acctually having to follow pvp mechanic because that would be to hard for us"


You're right a 10mn MWD stabber will do the job, however it can take several bumps to remove a miner from mining range, a 100mn MWD, this is the oversize MWD fit I was talking about, stabber is much more effective, less time consuming and an absolute hoot to fly. There's a big difference between being able to do the job and excelling at doing the job, to excel you have to compromise on both defence and offence.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#272 - 2012-11-30 18:28:03 UTC
Ahvram wrote:

Last time a checked every action in eve related to PVP there are some cause and effect. You gank concord pops you, You can/wreck flip you get and agression timer. You harass miners/freighters by pushing them around belts/gates you get? You take no risk for full reward.


You mine, you attract the attention of money hungry protection racket.
Ross Sylibus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#273 - 2012-11-30 18:35:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ross Sylibus
Ross Sylibus wrote:

Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


This was put in place of my post about miner bumping and how it is simply a symptom of a larger problem, and I described the relationship of miner bumping to this problem and suggested actions that should be taken related to miner bumping. The post was "liked" by 11 individuals and quoted by several others.

I don't know who "ISD Tyrozan" is but I would like a higher level GM to review his editing, as the post was previously reviewed by several CCP employees (I know because the thread was locked, cleaned and unlocked with my post still there) and deemed to be acceptable.

We cannot have an intelligent conversation if "ISD Tyrozan" here is going to eliminate any posts that do not follow his own point of view. I appreciate the need for forum moderation, and I'm not attempting to suggest that we should not have it, but editing the whole thread in order to leave only the comments that support his own personal views is NOT moderation - it is somebody's attempt to only have his own world view be considered by CCP in this discussion thread.

I spent a significant portion of my time to carefully think out my post and provide my feedback as a concerned member of the EVE community, and I do not appreciate the way my thoughtful contribution has been treated.
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#274 - 2012-11-30 18:40:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Ahvram
Ross Sylibus wrote:
Ross Sylibus wrote:

Edit: Rule 24 Off topic posting is prohibited - ISD Tyrozan


This was put in place of my post about miner bumping and how it is simply a symptom of a larger problem, and I described the relationship of miner bumping to this problem and suggested actions that should be taken related to miner bumping. The post was "liked" by 11 individuals and quoted by several others.

I don't know who "ISD Tyrozan" is but I would like a higher level GM to review his editing, as the post was previously reviewed by several CCP employees (I know because the thread was locked, cleaned and unlocked with my post still there) and deemed to be acceptable.

We cannot have an intelligent conversation if "ISD Tyrozan" here is going to eliminate any posts that do not follow his own point of view. I appreciate the need for forum moderation, and I'm not attempting to suggest that we should not have it, but editing the whole thread in order to leave only the comments that support his own personal views is NOT moderation - it is somebody's attempt to only have his own world view be considered by CCP in this discussion thread.



Ya The freighter bumping thread was locked and we where told to post here. Then all the post reguarding freighter bumping where deleted for being off topic. Something isnt right in CCP land.
Ross Sylibus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#275 - 2012-11-30 18:47:04 UTC
This was posted previous, quoted by several others and commented on. I am re-posting it now, as it is not off topic. The topic is how CCP should handle the miner bumping situation, and I believe my post speaks to this specifically:

Quote:
I think this comes down to a matter of goals.

If the goal is to make high sec completely free of all non-consensual PvP, and enable players to play the game without any non-consensual interaction, then miner bumping is griefing in that context and should be treated as such.

If EVE is meant to be built around the concept of conflict between players, then CCP needs to re-think the previous nerfs to high sec ganking - if ganking of miners had not been nerfed than miner bumping would not be "a thing", pure and simple - this is merely a result of travelling down a rabbit hole created as an unforeseen consequence of previous actions.

It is clear that there is a portion of EVE that wants the game to be about conflict and interaction between human beings. There is also a portion of EVE that wants the game to be about 'empire building' in the form of collecting minerals, isk etc and continued growth. Obviously these are not mutually exclusive as most players want some of both.

CCP is not being clear about their goals related to how the experience of EVE is to evolve, and this lack of clarity I think pervades their own ranks - it isn't a matter of not wanting to communicate this vision to the player base, they simply cannot agree themselves. I think any decision on this topic needs to be based on first determining what that vision is for the player experience in high sec and then acting accordingly

This debate is not at all about the actual function of the bumping mechanic - it is about what kind of game EVE is. If CCP has such a vision they should simply consult it and act accordingly related to this particular issue - if they don't, then broader discussion needs to first occur to determine the answer to that larger question before we continue down this path of tweaking minor details that only serve to embody the actualization of that vision.
Hyperspatia Lee
Memory Den
#276 - 2012-11-30 18:48:58 UTC
I do support a change to Eve bumping mechanics to make them more closely approximate real life physics.

A ship of relatively small mass bumping a much larger ship should bounce off with a relatively smaller effect on the inertia of the larger ship.

What players choose to bump, and when and why, does not in my humble opinion need to be addressed or changed.
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#277 - 2012-11-30 18:50:19 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Ahvram wrote:


Because Miner bumping only happen in ICE belts right? I mean there is no one who goes around bumping the ABC ore miners and demanding ISK?? Your reply is on par with the goon. Empty and pointless

And lets not forget I didnt ask to post here I was forced to post here by CCP.


Well, to be honest, yes, I did think there was literally no one going around bumping ABC ore miners and demanding ISK. Are you claiming that there are? If so, do you have proof of this assertion?


Idk let me log on and check my 2 miners ships for Machariel paint scratchs and ill get back to you.... The most infamous bumping is in the ice fields but it happens to the ABC miners all the time.

If anyone has a good solution to make everyone happy im all for it. Like Ive said the miner bumping isnt my biggest issue they have some options. But since CCP has roped freighter bumping into the same thread im here to be and advocate for the pilots who want something done about it. 3 day old dessie pilots should not be able to perma lock a freighter down by simply running into it and loling.
87102-6
Doomheim
#278 - 2012-11-30 18:52:22 UTC
Well I've had my chance to review the last 3-4 pages of posts. I also went back and read pages 4-8 for context (well, what hadn't been edited out by ISD, but I think I remember what folks said). I appreciate people trying to stay on topic per CCP Falcon's requirements, and I've already stated my two cents repeatedly, as have folks on the other side of the fence.

I've effectively tried to meet NO folks half way (so-to-speak) with a list of recommendations on how to to "settle down" (as in keep extorting but to tone very specific aspects down so that they might not be classified by some (including me) as harassment) -- and remember, I'm one of the few miners who would rather be ganked and blown up than bumped repeatedly while being condescended up in Local -- but have yet to see the same done in return.

But the straw that broke the camel's back was the following:

Quote:
Besides, you don't dictate how I play, or how I speak/converse with others. It's my game. Not yours.

There is absolutely nothing -- I repeat, NOTHING -- constructive or positive about a player base where people insist "you cannot dictate how I play/what I say" while in the exact same thread witnessing an entire organisation of individuals who spend their time in-game doing exactly that.

Needless to say -- and please don't take this as the action of a martyr -- I will be cancelling my subscription after making this post. This conflicts with what I said in my Assembly Hall thread (2nd-to-last paragraph), but the situation there was only heated, not downright utterly ignorant to the point of nausea. I had the same happen when I witnessed one NO member in this thread proposing that another player need provide an API key to validate some argument/point -- just that proposition itself encapsulates the malicious spirit of NO.

Remember: extortion is done for financial or material gain, and its been repeatedly stated by all NOA and James that the modus operandi of NO is not that. No amount of spin-doctoring can trump common sense.

I had higher hopes that the EVE community in general had somehow achieved the ability to be what the real world calls "reasonable" -- i.e. being able to disagree with another person and say "well I guess we just see it differently and that's okay". Being reasonable is not pompous, type-A, or borderline sociopathic. (Note: for some reason I'm now thinking of King Missile quotes: "Love is not a shipload of slaughtered pigs rotting and festering in the bleating desert" :D ). Those hopes were my own, so I guess you could say the only person I have to blame for that is myself. C'est la vie.

To CCP Falcon -- thank you for making this thread (and our conversation!) and giving folks a chance to air their views. I didn't expect anyone to do that, so that's at least one positive thing I can take away from this experience. Takk fyrir.
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#279 - 2012-11-30 18:52:52 UTC
Hyperspatia Lee wrote:
I do support a change to Eve bumping mechanics to make them more closely approximate real life physics.

A ship of relatively small mass bumping a much larger ship should bounce off with a relatively smaller effect on the inertia of the larger ship.

What players choose to bump, and when and why, does not in my humble opinion need to be addressed or changed.


Just fyi, realistic physics would involve a mining barge exploding all over the place when even a frigate or destroyer with an overheated MWD hit it.

4000m/s is very fast in the real world.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#280 - 2012-11-30 18:54:14 UTC
Ahvram wrote:


You have plenty of options available, yet you blatently choose not to use them. Plus, most of your claimed 'facts' on bumping & suicide ganking are completely false.

Says a Goon lol. The "Facts" most come from your little forum posts and the bumper blogs. So sad you have ran out of good arguments at this point to defend this pathetic exploit. Again im sure you guys love risk free pvp I mean doing it the right way isnt the goon way after all.


Funny how we've been putting these facts in to practice for years now. There is no right way to PvP. You need to get this idea out of your head, because every action in this game is PvP, even mining & mission running. the only one that has run out of arguments is you, since you keep referring to a valid game mechanic as an emploit what it's not.

Take active measure to defend yourself & stop playing the victim card.

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.