These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Shylari Avada
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#521 - 2012-12-03 23:18:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Shylari Avada
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk...


This would cause even more (hilarious) rage, miners fighting back... Lol

This can only end well.

Edit- For clarity, your idea is terrible, it was cause rather hilarious forum posts/drama and lead to some very interesting killmails though.
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#522 - 2012-12-03 23:55:03 UTC
Anslo wrote:
It may not be an issue for you, but for others it is. Otherwise, it wouldn't be here. Attempting to discredit it by repeating "why is this here" and "this is a none-issue" will not make it go away. People do not like it. Just because they aren't posting here does not mean everyone in the galaxy like this. Smile


Did you even read their posts?

Anslo wrote:

CCP did not design a game where players can exhibit out right malevolent hostility towards a group of players because they are jealous they make a few bucks shooting an NPC. Griefing is one thing. Harassing is another. Spout the EULA definition of harassment all you want, but at the end of the day, by the English definition, what is happening is harassment.

I changed your post to be about people afk cloaking in nullsec. I changed one word.

Both arguments are equally ridiculous. Do I need to take a picture of the orbit button for you?

Anslo wrote:
Tusen Takk wrote:
meaningless words


Ok then. In the end, I and others will still call it what it is, targeted harassment. Smile


Is it harassment if I was to park a bomber or black ops battleship in the middle of -A- sov?




[quote=Shvak]Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


There's a whole lot wrong with this post, but I'm just going to ask that you tell him to mash the orbit button.
xh'neivers
House of Carrikk
#523 - 2012-12-04 00:01:07 UTC
I see lots of comments about 'emergent gameplay' often used in conjunction with almost tongue in cheek propaganda about how good this type of behavior (miner bumping) is for the game.

That seems to assume that all 'emergent gameplay' is good for the game!

Eve is a harsh game, as it should be. However there is a line that should not be crossed and the overly personal and aggressive tactics used by the bumpers is exactly what is going to put the game into a spiral of worsening social behavior. It's a abuse of a game mechanic that drives away moderate (generally industrial and hence potentially long term) players and encourages people that just play to cause as much out of game pain to others as possible - generally only ever focusing on the easiest possible targets.

CCP have challenged this behavior on the forums of late with the crack down of crap posting, verbal assaults, etc. Hopefully this will change the fact that for a long time few longer term players wanted to use or even look at the cess pool the forums had become.

The websites set up by bumpers, the 'fame' of the main organizers, etc - these people are one and the same. Before it was suicide ganking for 'lolz'. When that became too much effort, it swapped to 'bumping'. Something there is even less defense about. The fact that these are the same numpties that take pleasure in turning the game forums into such a mire CCP have had to step in and crack down should speak volumes.
Van Kuzco
Perkone
Caldari State
#524 - 2012-12-04 00:16:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Kuzco
Anslo wrote:

You are engaging in activity with as little risk as the miners you moan and complain about. Why should your activity have risk when there's doesn't? There interaction has little reaction or activity to other players. Yours does.


What's the risk? The miner's ship is intact and all they've lost is theoretical isk that they weren't even at their keyboard to make.

CCP already gave you the tools to counter bumping. Just not in the most efficient ship.

You want to make a stand? Tell all the 'opposition' miners to jump in skiffs and mine in the face of bumpers. If the miners really stand on 'principle' to just not pay, then this should be no issue for them. I suggest they won't however, since most of the miners who complain here are just greedy and not willing to change anything about their own playstyle and instead just ask CCP to fix everything. This is the attitude that the bumpers hate and why they're willing to sacrifice their time (in which they could be doing much more profitable things) to fight it.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#525 - 2012-12-04 00:59:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
xh'neivers wrote:
I see lots of comments about 'emergent gameplay' often used in conjunction with almost tongue in cheek propaganda about how good this type of behavior (miner bumping) is for the game.

That seems to assume that all 'emergent gameplay' is good for the game!

Eve is a harsh game, as it should be. However there is a line that should not be crossed and the overly personal and aggressive tactics used by the bumpers is exactly what is going to put the game into a spiral of worsening social behavior. It's a abuse of a game mechanic that drives away moderate (generally industrial and hence potentially long term) players and encourages people that just play to cause as much out of game pain to others as possible - generally only ever focusing on the easiest possible targets.


To be honest, most of the overly personal attacks have come from the miners, bumpers have been told to commit suicide, their parentage questioned, been compared to a genocidal maniac whose name normally invokes Godwins law and much much worse, some of the miners have been petitioned for their comments, and some of those petitions have been acted upon by GMs for violations of the EULA.

Aggression is very much part of the Eve experience, without it we may as well be playing a single player spaceship sim, one that would suck by the way. The moderate players you mention are indeed industrialists, without the constant explosions, aggression, destruction and the myriad ways we inflict virtual pain on each other they'd have nobody to sell their products to. Many are constantly adapting to the ever changing landscape that threatens their way of life, a clever industrialist will see opportunity in the chaos that is caused by bumping and suicide ganking and adapt his or her "business" to suit, the ones that don't want to adapt will whine on the forums and try and inflict change on the game to suit themselves.

There's a reason why business is known as cut throat, it's vicious and if an industrialist can get one up on their competition via legitimate mechanics, they'd be a fool not to take advantage of another industrialists weakness, this applies to both the real world and the universe we choose to virtually inhabit.

Quote:
CCP have challenged this behavior on the forums of late with the crack down of crap posting, verbal assaults, etc. Hopefully this will change the fact that for a long time few longer term players wanted to use or even look at the cess pool the forums had become.


If you look at the forums, the people frothing at the mouth over this are not the bumpers or the gankers, it's the people who want to be able to play without any player interaction and possibly afk. I've yet to see an argument from a "victim" as to the how and why it's an exploit of a game mechanic that goes beyond "I don't like it, I pay for this game, I want to be left alone" etc, I've seen plenty of arguments as to how and why it isn't, with explanations of how the mechanics work and how they relate to PvP in whspace and all areas of kspace.

Quote:
The websites set up by bumpers, the 'fame' of the main organizers, etc - these people are one and the same. Before it was suicide ganking for 'lolz'. When that became too much effort, it swapped to 'bumping'.


Suicide ganking for lols died down because of the recent barge buff, that's not to say that suicide ganking is no longer possible, it is and now requires teamwork, coordination and planning, something that should be encouraged. Bumping itself is the result of people adapting to the buff, it can be done solo or in groups.

Both suicide ganking and bumping are economic warfare, neither is particularly hard to avoid as has been repeatedly posted by people in this thread, they should be heeded, they're the ones inflicting this form of warfare on others so they should know. Don't like the idea of people taxing your way of playing Eve, move somewhere else, where the tax isn't applied.

Quote:
Something there is even less defense about. The fact that these are the same numpties that take pleasure in turning the game forums into such a mire CCP have had to step in and crack down should speak volumes.


The forums have been a cesspool of trolls for many years, CCP tend to step in when things are about to get totally out of control, most of the time the forums are self moderating, there's an ignore function for a reason, if you see an overly obvious troll and can't post without resorting to trolling back, ignore them.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#526 - 2012-12-04 01:00:13 UTC
xh'neivers wrote:
However there is a line that should not be crossed and the overly personal and aggressive tactics used by the bumpers is exactly what is going to put the game into a spiral of worsening social behavior.

It's a abuse of a game mechanic that drives away moderate (generally industrial and hence potentially long term) players and encourages people that just play to cause as much out of game pain to others as possible - generally only ever focusing on the easiest possible targets.


Pray tell, o guardian of proper social behavior, what are these overtly personal and aggressive tactics? Compared to what? I'd say burning down all the things you and your friends own and camping you into a station for a weeks is personal and aggressive. Having you suffer a minor inconvenience of a lost mining cycle when you did not even bother to take protective measures against a bump is nothing compared to that.

All other lines of work in this game have their own quirks and risks. The bot-aspirant miner's total lack of relativity in this issue is what primarily motivates me to bump. For you, everything must be 100% safe and until that day comes you will spew your thinly veiled unsubscribe threats at CCP.

I subscribed back after being away for 4 years. To bump you.

Eve is worth fighting for.
BigSako
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#527 - 2012-12-04 01:48:22 UTC
My opinion: Bumping in lowsec or 0.0 should stay as it is - a valid game mechanic.

In HIghsec, bumping should be considered an exploit or aggression (dont think aggression will work though) IF it keeps a ship from initiating warp (remembering when CCP announced that using a stasis web to keep a ship from entering warp was an exploit!). The only thing that CAN AFFECT the warp ability is a Warp Scrambler, Warp Disruptor or Focused Point, and the only way to do that is to either have killrights or be in a wardec.

So long story short: Repeatedly bumping another ship to prevent it from entering warp IN HIGHSEC should either be an exploit or aggression.

Second thing: Aggression mechanics. With current aggression mechanics some people are exploiting the fact that you can use a rookie ship with no skills whatsoever, aggress the freighter, and re-agress it with another rookie ship 14 minutes later. If the freighter pilot logs off, they can keep the freighter in space for an infinite amount of time.
This is definateley NOT working as intended. A FREE ship on a FREE TRIAL account that does not use any ammo at all should not be able to keep any other ship agressed for another 15 minutes in highsec!
Where to draw the line? Make them use a real ship instead? Doesn't fix the problem.

Solution: Aggression mechanics IN HIGHSEC should only apply to pilots that are currently under a wardec, somebody has killrights on them or the pilot has engaged somebody else before. Why on earth is an aggression timer even applied to a FREIGHTER that can't do anything other then aligning and warping.


Will this stop freighter ganking? No.
But it fixes the problem that the gankers literally have INFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME (at least till next downtime) to keep a freighter in space by continously bumping it with ships like Machariels and re-aggressing it every 14 minutes.
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#528 - 2012-12-04 02:43:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Marksalot
BigSako wrote:
My opinion: Bumping in lowsec or 0.0 should stay as it is - a valid game mechanic.

In HIghsec, bumping should be considered an exploit or aggression (dont think aggression will work though) IF it keeps a ship from initiating warp (remembering when CCP announced that using a stasis web to keep a ship from entering warp was an exploit!). The only thing that CAN AFFECT the warp ability is a Warp Scrambler, Warp Disruptor or Focused Point, and the only way to do that is to either have killrights or be in a wardec.

So long story short: Repeatedly bumping another ship to prevent it from entering warp IN HIGHSEC should either be an exploit or aggression.


ahaha no

Quote:

Second thing: Aggression mechanics. With current aggression mechanics some people are exploiting the fact that you can use a rookie ship with no skills whatsoever, aggress the freighter, and re-agress it with another rookie ship 14 minutes later. If the freighter pilot logs off, they can keep the freighter in space for an infinite amount of time.
This is definateley NOT working as intended. A FREE ship on a FREE TRIAL account that does not use any ammo at all should not be able to keep any other ship agressed for another 15 minutes in highsec!
Where to draw the line? Make them use a real ship instead? Doesn't fix the problem.

Solution: Aggression mechanics IN HIGHSEC should only apply to pilots that are currently under a wardec, somebody has killrights on them or the pilot has engaged somebody else before. Why on earth is an aggression timer even applied to a FREIGHTER that can't do anything other then aligning and warping.

We don't use trial accounts. No need to. Also, the suicide aggression ships do need a small amount of skills for optimum utility. The only reason ~free~ ships are used is because of lazyness and how terrible the eve fitting tool is. Nobody wants to fit 500 suicide bursts or whatever.
You're making an issue out of a problem that isn't there. (CCP, fix the damned fitting tool so I can keep a pile of 80km aggrofrigates)

Quote:

Will this stop freighter ganking? No.
But it fixes the problem that the gankers literally have INFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME (at least till next downtime) to keep a freighter in space by continously bumping it with ships like Machariels and re-aggressing it every 14 minutes.


It's very rare that we need more than 15min. And those cases usually involve the target bringing a fleet to fight back. So again, making an issue out of a non-existent problem.

E: I just want to add that there is literally no excuse for someone losing their freighter to us. We're easy to avoid/defeat. It's just that logistics folks are too damned complacent to do anything other than autopilot around with 15b in cargo.
Shvak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#529 - 2012-12-04 06:56:36 UTC
Shylari Avada wrote:
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk...


This would cause even more (hilarious) rage, miners fighting back... Lol

This can only end well.

Edit- For clarity, your idea is terrible, it was cause rather hilarious forum posts/drama and lead to some very interesting killmails though.

Why is it terrible?
It allows a response without developers making hard anchors or other mechanics to stop it or worse still having bans imposed or making bumping illegal.
It affects AFK miners, the reputed target of the bumping as claimed by legitimate bumpers.
A win-win I say.
For the record I am not a miner although I do own one. But like with everything I would have like to try and send a certain bumper home in his pod or most likely he would have podded me, I make no claims at Eve PvP L33t-ness.
It would be more fun for the bumper as well, never knowing whether a fleet is going to warp in and warm up his day.
I just object to the lack of risk to the bumper, he can bump all day immune to retribution unless you want a visit from concord. I am sure some mercenary units may even put in a few bait AFK mining ships just waiting for the bump…
Would there be funny kill mails, sure, will everyone be happy, no but it would be a hell of a lot better than, bump, bump, bump, see ship that can kill me run to gate for safety, return and bump some more.
Again I am not speaking on behalf of miners here, but if bumping is to be a legitimate revenue stream surely they should not object to adding a little risk to the endevour.
Basic suggestion, it can be worked on or ignored 
Bump, allow bumpee (got to love new words) 10 to 15 seconds to react, after that timer is gone it is done. You can even add a 15 minute bump free timer after that when the bumpee cannot activate a kill mail to exclude AFK miners from realizing too late they have been moved.
Again it is a choice the miner makes, if he is a bait ship, well then the bumper ship just became one big “Alpha-Zone” (could I copyright that).
It will stop miners whining about risk free harassment, they can react. It is their choice. But it also allows the bumper to bring in a ….-storm of his own…
Did not mean to insult the Navy fit Stabber pilot, most Stabber fits I see are empty speed fit bumpers.
I am new to this, if the idea is so terrible explain, I do not AFK mine, or mine for that fact (unless you will count the new frigate which I will try once for fun.)
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#530 - 2012-12-04 07:01:50 UTC  |  Edited by: SaKoil
Shvak wrote:

Why is it terrible?
It allows a response without developers making hard anchors or other mechanics to stop it or worse still having bans imposed or making bumping illegal.


How would you formulate the rules for this bump induced aggression? What comes to my mind immediately is placing a gank ship behind a miner and bump the miner with another ship, causing the heroic miner to ram the gank ship at 2000m/sec.

There is nothing wrong with the current mechanics.

Edit:
Shvak wrote:

Again I am not speaking on behalf of miners here, but if bumping is to be a legitimate revenue stream surely they should not object to adding a little risk to the endevour.


If mining is to be a legitimate revenue stream, surely they can risk a lost mining cycle if they refuse to use the countless other methods presented to them.
Shvak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#531 - 2012-12-04 07:10:26 UTC
SaKoil wrote:
Shvak wrote:

Why is it terrible?
It allows a response without developers making hard anchors or other mechanics to stop it or worse still having bans imposed or making bumping illegal.


How would you formulate the rules for this bump induced aggression? What comes to my mind immediately is placing a gank ship behind a miner and bump the miner with another ship, causing the heroic miner to ram the gank ship at 2000m/sec.

There is nothing wrong with the current mechanics.

Edit:
Shvak wrote:

Again I am not speaking on behalf of miners here, but if bumping is to be a legitimate revenue stream surely they should not object to adding a little risk to the endevour.


If mining is to be a legitimate revenue stream, surely they can risk a lost mining cycle if they refuse to use the countless other methods presented to them.


I stand corrected, my plan sucks Shocked
Lady Cub
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#532 - 2012-12-04 08:52:29 UTC
It Appears to me that Many of you have not read these, so I will post links to them. While they may list some examples, they are not limited to these:
If I must quote every Detail and hold your hands... Thats sad... But you can still be saved, Perrmit me Lovers.


Rules & Policies
Where can I read all the EVE Online Rules Policies?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=291

EVE Online TERMS OF SERVICE
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp

Grief play
What is grief play?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336

Scams and exploits
What are scams and/or exploits?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=34

Reporting scams and exploits
How can I report scams, cheating and/or exploiting?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=27

SUSPENSION AND BAN POLICY
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/banning.asp

Escalation to a senior Game Master
When and how can petitions be escalated to a senior Game Master?
Also Includes Internal Affairs Contact:
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=29

Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#533 - 2012-12-04 09:29:32 UTC
Lady Cub wrote:
It Appears to me that Many of you have not read these, so I will post links to them. While they may list some examples, they are not limited to these:
If I must quote every Detail and hold your hands... Thats sad... But you can still be saved, Perrmit me Lovers.


Rules & Policies
Where can I read all the EVE Online Rules Policies?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=291

EVE Online TERMS OF SERVICE
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp

Grief play
What is grief play?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336

Scams and exploits
What are scams and/or exploits?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=34

Reporting scams and exploits
How can I report scams, cheating and/or exploiting?
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=27

SUSPENSION AND BAN POLICY
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/banning.asp

Escalation to a senior Game Master
When and how can petitions be escalated to a senior Game Master?
Also Includes Internal Affairs Contact:
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=29



Many of us have read them, that's why we know exactly what we are allowed to do with in the game rules.

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.
Razesdark
Immediate Success
#534 - 2012-12-04 09:39:43 UTC
Probably a troll post, but i'll bite.
BigSako wrote:
My opinion: Bumping in lowsec or 0.0 should stay as it is - a valid game mechanic.

In HIghsec, bumping should be considered an exploit or aggression (dont think aggression will work though) IF it keeps a ship from initiating warp (remembering when CCP announced that using a stasis web to keep a ship from entering warp was an exploit!). The only thing that CAN AFFECT the warp ability is a Warp Scrambler, Warp Disruptor or Focused Point, and the only way to do that is to either have killrights or be in a wardec.

Yes, because pirates will clearly just bump you off the roids in low/null.

BigSako wrote:

So long story short: Repeatedly bumping another ship to prevent it from entering warp IN HIGHSEC should either be an exploit or aggression.
Second thing: Aggression mechanics. With current aggression mechanics some people are exploiting the fact that you can use a rookie ship with no skills whatsoever, aggress the freighter, and re-agress it with another rookie ship 14 minutes later. If the freighter pilot logs off, they can keep the freighter in space for an infinite amount of time.
This is definateley NOT working as intended. A FREE ship on a FREE TRIAL account that does not use any ammo at all should not be able to keep any other ship agressed for another 15 minutes in highsec!
Where to draw the line? Make them use a real ship instead? Doesn't fix the problem.

What problem?
Like most of eve, even suicide ganking is a very static thing. There are plenty of ways to adapt. Sure, you might need to put in some more effort to get what you want done but you will get there.
BigSako wrote:

Solution: Aggression mechanics IN HIGHSEC should only apply to pilots that are currently under a wardec, somebody has killrights on them or the pilot has engaged somebody else before. Why on earth is an aggression timer even applied to a FREIGHTER that can't do anything other then aligning and warping.

That's the risk you take from flying freighters. They are slow and vulnerable to attacks. If you want to avoid gankers, fly blockade runners.
BigSako wrote:

Will this stop freighter ganking? No.
But it fixes the problem that the gankers literally have INFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME (at least till next downtime) to keep a freighter in space by continously bumping it with ships like Machariels and re-aggressing it every 14 minutes.

I implore you to take out a huge mortage and buy a few gold bars.
Then go to a big city which you consider as safe, and wave those gold bars around and yell about how you have them, then time how long you have them until someone punches you in the gut and steal them. No where is safe. And High-sec is no exception.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#535 - 2012-12-04 10:36:35 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


The problem here is that you flat out contradict yourself. One of the first things you allude to is ganking the bumper, but then go on to spew tears about how they are "immune" and there was "Nothing I could do". You make reference yourself to something you could do, something that proves they aren't immune. So how on earth can you make those statements? You REFUSED to help your corpmate, and he REFUSED to help himself. Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP.

Revolting.
Shvak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#536 - 2012-12-04 10:53:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Shvak
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


The problem here is that you flat out contradict yourself. One of the first things you allude to is ganking the bumper, but then go on to spew tears about how they are "immune" and there was "Nothing I could do". You make reference yourself to something you could do, something that proves they aren't immune. So how on earth can you make those statements? You REFUSED to help your corpmate, and he REFUSED to help himself. Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP.

Revolting.

Just wondering if you are running for office?
Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP, what crap, this is a discussion thread.
I have never petitioned CCP ever.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#537 - 2012-12-04 11:08:17 UTC
Shvak wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


The problem here is that you flat out contradict yourself. One of the first things you allude to is ganking the bumper, but then go on to spew tears about how they are "immune" and there was "Nothing I could do". You make reference yourself to something you could do, something that proves they aren't immune. So how on earth can you make those statements? You REFUSED to help your corpmate, and he REFUSED to help himself. Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP.

Revolting.

Just wondering if you are running for office?
Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP, what crap, this is a discussion thread.
I have never petitioned CCP ever.


You aren't a very good friend if you watched someone take advantage of him. You should be ashamed of yourself.

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.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#538 - 2012-12-04 11:23:13 UTC
Shvak wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


The problem here is that you flat out contradict yourself. One of the first things you allude to is ganking the bumper, but then go on to spew tears about how they are "immune" and there was "Nothing I could do". You make reference yourself to something you could do, something that proves they aren't immune. So how on earth can you make those statements? You REFUSED to help your corpmate, and he REFUSED to help himself. Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP.

Revolting.

Just wondering if you are running for office?
Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP, what crap, this is a discussion thread.
I have never petitioned CCP ever.


Complaint may have been a strong word, but you're in a thread where they're asking what/if anything should be done and you were posting ideas after implying there is a serious problem (by claiming they're immune)... even though you seem to acknowledge in your own post that they AREN'T immune and the only reason nothing happens to them is because miners are unwilling to do anything at all, and instead want mechanics changed.

I want the mechanics changed so as soon as a nastymans targets me his ship blows up, because I don't want to have to press F1 anymore.

How about it CCP
Shvak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#539 - 2012-12-04 11:26:21 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Shvak wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Shvak wrote:
Watched a corp mate getting bumped despite being online. There is not much that he or I could do. A cheap Stabber not worth killing and having concord all over you. Nothing I could do to help my corp mate, the bumper is immune and fly such a cheap ship killing him makes no sense. I have no issue with bumping but I believe there must be an effective counter. I would favour a brief 10 second aggression timer (kill rights) for the ship bumped that he can react if he is not afk. The big argument for the pro-bumpers is it combats afk mining. Which is valid, you target an afk miner, no problem. You target a miner at his keyboard and you will have to reap the whirlwind.
He can then maybe be given the right to activate killrights and maybe sell it starting a 15 minute timer of open season on the bumper.
It eliminates the whole we are cleaning up afk mining and takes away the immunity they currently have against normal miners.
It means there is an effective counter of very short duration to bumpers without taking away their basic business model.
Neither side would be totally happy Big smile


The problem here is that you flat out contradict yourself. One of the first things you allude to is ganking the bumper, but then go on to spew tears about how they are "immune" and there was "Nothing I could do". You make reference yourself to something you could do, something that proves they aren't immune. So how on earth can you make those statements? You REFUSED to help your corpmate, and he REFUSED to help himself. Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP.

Revolting.

Just wondering if you are running for office?
Then you make false statements as part of a complaint to CCP, what crap, this is a discussion thread.
I have never petitioned CCP ever.


You aren't a very good friend if you watched someone take advantage of him. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Got to admit, you hit the nail on the head.
Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile
Mariko Bukan
Zanshin - Everything and Nothing
#540 - 2012-12-04 21:41:55 UTC
First things first:

"Bumping is a legal game mechanic" Fact

Should it be changed ..... YES and NO it has it's valid uses, It could be improved if the effect was ship mass / velocity related.

To quote a game mate:

"Should a gnat affect the direction of an Elephant"

In my view this answer is NO so that's one for the programmers.

Is this current mechanic valid for miner bumping?

In my view it depends on the intended use of the mechanic:

To list a few uses of the mechanic and I am sure there are many more

a. Bumping ninja looters in Incursion Mom sites ... valid
b. Preventing fair combat targets warping off ... valid
c. Bumping ships out of a POS shield ... valid
d. Annoying corpies and fleet mates ... very valid and fun :-)
e. etc etc

So is the use of the bumping mechanic valid with ice miner bumping and Extortion, lets see.

http://www.minerbumping.com/

http://www.minerbumping.com/2012/12/you-gotta-fight-for-your-right.html

This image is on their blog dated, Saturday 1st of December, has with this quote:

"Fight for what's right, Fight for your right, to bump!"

This Image clearly shows an armed person killing an un-armed person, so the image is actively publicising an intent towards unarmed miners by armed players, as is the content of the afore mentioned site.


In addition is "The Code" http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html

Some particular paragraphs, quotes and FAQs caught my eye:

" I can stop people from mining whenever I want. Since the miners want to mine ice, and since I alone decide whether or not they can, I command them. It's really that simple."

- No excessive mining. Miners should not fall into a routine of mining all day. I want well-rounded people in my system, not ice-mining machines.

- The New Order of Highsec continues to recognize The Mittani as the legitimate Chairman of the CSM. This determination remains the rule in all New Order territories.

- Prejudice toward minorities is not permitted. For the sake of clarity, this cannot apply to all groups claiming minority status, but only discrete and insular minorities, which are defined as suicide gankers, Goons, and others who oppose high sec mining.

"- To minimize the workload of our GMs, miners shall not file petitions against the Supreme Protector or his Agents. Failure to abide by this rule is an automatic Red Pen violation (see below)."

"- Red Pen. On my desk there is a sheet of paper. In my desk there is a drawer. Inside this drawer is a Red Pen. If a miner commits an egregious offence or series of offences, his name will be written on the paper with the Red Pen. If your name is written in Red Pen, the cost of an indulgence will be trebled and you will be at increased risk of bumping."

Goofus claims to be a disabled military veteran, or a single mother, or that mining is relaxing.
Gallant admits that he has no good reason for mining in high-sec.

The Site Brags about being Invincible being in a NPC corps.
In addition there seems to a use of single man corps War Dec'ing indi corps as well.

So the sole purpose is to promote and advocate a hate mongering philosophy towards a specific type of EVE player?

These are very clearly breaches to the EULA in my view.

The key points of the eveonline site I refer to are highlighted below:

Please refer to: http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/banning.asp

3. HARASSMENT

An immediate permanent ban of an account may result if a player:

a. Organizes or participates in a corporation or group that is based on or advocates any anti-ethnic, anti-gay, anti-religious, racist, sexist or other hate-mongering philosophies.

Severe offences may result in an immediate ban without warning; however, warnings may be given for first time offenses, followed by account suspensions of varying degree and ultimately a permanent ban if a player:

a. Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative.

b. Uses role-playing as an excuse for violating the guidelines regarding fair play with others.

c. Sends excessive e-mails, EVE-mails or petitions, petitions with false information or repeatedly petitions under the wrong category in an effort to circumvent the customer support queue.

I await the storm .....