These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

GM Response On Bumping

First post First post First post
Author
Mag's
Azn Empire
#221 - 2013-07-03 08:00:43 UTC
jedijed wrote:
I dont really care what you think about me . Im doing this more so for the next person . most people dont get to record u guys greifing them for an hr . most people arent smart enuff to get concord on grid to insta ur gank fleet . This is the 2 things that makes this gank unusual. Extreme is more appropriate
Most people are not smart enough, full stop. This is yet another reason why, it's working as intended.

Oh and just how do you warp to zero, when using AP?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#222 - 2013-07-09 18:18:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
The equating of locating and pursuing a miner to continual-bump him as 'harassment' smacks of continued road-to-nerfdom crap, IMHO.

Consider, it's ok to declare war on a player corp, run locates and ruthlessly hunt a player down and pop his ship (repeatedly if he keeps flying blingy tasty morsels); yet somehow the continual hunting and bumping of a carebears mining ship becomes 'harassment'...

What if that miner shot off his mouth in local? Smacked talked during a previous engagement? Brought said bumping 'harassment' upon himself?

CCP, Is EVE an emergent self-regulating 'retribution' sandbox or not?

I'm having trouble telling between the marketing and reality difference here, because one would think said miner would just be expected to dec the agressor pilot (corp), hire mercs to do it for him, take some retributive action...not rely on being bubble-wrapped by CCP with non-code mandates on a fricken website...

As I've often said, if something is worth having a 'rule' for, then its worth CODING for it so the impact is equally and objectively applied across the community. What CCP unfortunately sets up with their GM 'rulings' and mandates like this is sadly akin to the russian judge at the olympics scoring interpretive dance based on his whims (or what he had for lunch that day...)

If CCP implemented these ''rules' or protections for the poor carebears by code -- making someone go suspect after bumping another players ship above a certain number of times within a certain time period, then at least the mechanic is evenly and uniformly applied, experienced and debated by the community. Problem here is CCP is trying to have their cake and eat it too, avoid implementing code changes that will cause rebellion, but issuing nerfing 'rules' through their web site.

FAIL
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#223 - 2013-07-09 18:22:06 UTC
Mag's wrote:
jedijed wrote:
I dont really care what you think about me . Im doing this more so for the next person . most people dont get to record u guys greifing them for an hr . most people arent smart enuff to get concord on grid to insta ur gank fleet . This is the 2 things that makes this gank unusual. Extreme is more appropriate
Most people are not smart enough, full stop. This is yet another reason why, it's working as intended.

Oh and just how do you warp to zero, when using AP?



You warp before the AP initiates it. (Spam jump button)

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.

ZaBob
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#224 - 2013-07-10 14:48:04 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
ZaBob wrote:
Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.

It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).

There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.

A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.

Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it.


War dec us. Gank us. Pay us the fees you owe for operating in our systems. Take the miniscule effort to move system.

You have a number options available to you. Don't pretend like you don't have any choice at all though. That's just dishonest.


Ah, you didn't actually read what I wrote, did you?

But pay a "fee" for operating in "your" system? I *never* pay ransoms. Get lost, twerp.
ZaBob
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2013-07-10 15:20:05 UTC
D35 wrote:
ZaBob wrote:
Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.

It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).

There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.

A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.

Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it.

I don't see any imbalance here since there is one mechanic that completely protects you from bumping: Moving out of the way. No bumper will waste their time trying to bump something which they can't.

I've seen some miners refusing to do this, deliberately making themselves "victims", because of their principles. But seriously, it's not hard to double click the space.


Have you actually mined ice? Mining ships are slow (hard to move out of the way), and mining lasers have limited range, so if you end up out-of-range, you end up with nothing for that entire long cycle. "Moving out of the way" is likely to have the same result as getting yourself bumped.

All I'm suggesting is that the playing field ought be a bit more balanced. Like maybe if someone collides with you (perhaps repeatedly), you get the right to web them, so you CAN get out of the way next time. You have to give something up in your fitting to fit the web.

I don't like the idea of petitioning any more than I like the idea of packing up operations and moving a long way away. I'd rather be able to deal with it myself with a reasonable mechanic.

Someone suggested hugging the ice to make it hard to bump you away. That might work if the bumper isn't good at 3D geometry, but it makes it harder to avoid bumping, and harder to escape a gank. But if combining that with "keep at range" lets you stay in mining laser range then it's a counter-mechanic. (It doesn't matter that "keep at range" is automatic -- you can't do any better than that manually, so I'm using it as a reference point).

But I bet two bumpers working together can force you out of range even so. But so far, I've not seen tag team bumpers where both were sufficiently juvenile to persist for an hour.

Merc contracts? Need a wardec, and way too slow to be effective. Bounty, likewise.

Maybe being able to declare a short-term wardec, maybe 24 hours, limited to one constellation, 15 minute notice, limitted to you and your target (not your corp)? Allow allies, so you can hire a merc or bring in an alt or corpmate (since you're sitting in a mining ship).

If this were more balanced, there'd be no need for CCP to declare it an exploit even if they DO follow you around.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#226 - 2013-07-10 18:35:17 UTC
ZaBob wrote:
Have you actually mined ice? Mining ships are slow (hard to move out of the way), and mining lasers have limited range, so if you end up out-of-range, you end up with nothing for that entire long cycle. "Moving out of the way" is likely to have the same result as getting yourself bumped.


No they aren't (644m/s), and learn to fly better so you don't fly yourself out of range.
[Skiff, Bump-Proof]

Ice Harvester Upgrade II
Ice Harvester Upgrade II

Experimental 10MN Afterburner I
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Limited 'Anointed' EM Ward Field
Upgraded Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I

Ice Harvester II

Medium Ancillary Current Router I
[Empty Rig slot]


Quote:
All I'm suggesting is that the playing field ought be a bit more balanced. Like maybe if someone collides with you (perhaps repeatedly), you get the right to web them, so you CAN get out of the way next time. You have to give something up in your fitting to fit the web.


Mmmm, aggression rights against freighters in Jita. Delicious idea.

Quote:
Someone suggested hugging the ice to make it hard to bump you away. That might work if the bumper isn't good at 3D geometry, but it makes it harder to avoid bumping, and harder to escape a gank. But if combining that with "keep at range" lets you stay in mining laser range then it's a counter-mechanic. (It doesn't matter that "keep at range" is automatic -- you can't do any better than that manually, so I'm using it as a reference point).


You can do way, way better than keep at range does.

Quote:
But I bet two bumpers working together can force you out of range even so. But so far, I've not seen tag team bumpers where both were sufficiently juvenile to persist for an hour.


2 people needed to disrupt the activities of one? Sounds balanced to me.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Callathar Tivianne
LoneStar Ltd.
#227 - 2013-07-15 13:15:43 UTC
i love it when carebear is making tear thread, he's flamed to death, but when ccp makes a little gesture towards mentioned carebear, big bad piwhates are QQ themself :P hipocrisy...? Roll
disillusional
Autism Cartel
#228 - 2013-07-18 12:57:56 UTC  |  Edited by: disillusional
I disagree with the GM on this, everybody knows that people shouldn't be able to mine in hi-sec without some element of pain and grief. To kowtow to the pathetic tears of miners who clearly can't deal with a bit of "banter" in system is pathetic. The first thought that came into my head when I read this post was that EVE Online was adopting the same kind of heavy handed, community destroying moderation which besets World of Warcraft. EVE is about being able to do whatever you want, whenever you want so long as it's within the rules and the EULA, bumping another player repeatedly in my opinion is not harassment, there are no abusive elements or threats.

In retrospect the thought of a retriever being bumped repeatedly to the point the pilot decides to lodge a petition makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. Twisted
Khaos Wildfire
Forlorn Heroes
#229 - 2013-07-20 07:50:30 UTC
I have recently returned to Eve to reconnect with old friends and have been trying to get caught up with many of the new changes.

I have considered extortion to make money in previous years, similar to what is going on now, so I'll bring everything out so as to hopefully shed some light and concern on this entire situation.

First of all, I've done a few ganks in high sec on poor miners. At least last year 1 catalyst with T2 mods could kill any mack in .5 space that did not have defenses. I did it for no reason other than being bored and needed refueled on tears.

I have also done a fair share of mining on alts. Sometimes I'd rather watch a movie but still make a few million isk.

There are a number of game mechanics that I would like to call into question here. Some have been poorly and vaguely addressed in this thread already, but I will extrapolate on them to make a few points.

First - this talking about bumping and harassment. Okay, that's fine if CCP wants to eventually call it harassment. I don't think that someone should be followed for hours on end, after all, CCP realizes miners (or anyone) are paying to play this game and will quit if they do not get to play....it's just good business.

However, bumping someone to effectively warp scramble them is definitely a cause for concern. It does avoid any negative effects associated with high sec piracy. Also - accounts can be created daily in order to make sure that your "bumping" ship isn't set to red - allowing you to access any system for scouting and bumping purposes. This means that setting these 'scout/bumpers" is not effective. It also means dozens of alts are created each day just for this purpose.

But that in of itself is not what is causing high sec miners to be concerned. (And for the sake of argument, lets remove the botting from the picture.) This bumping is associated not with ONLY with harassment - but with extremely costly ship destructions by -10 players in frigs and destroyers/

Their tactics are simple - emerge from low sec, avoid NPC destruction, and proceed to the system and belt in question. Then the neutral scout bumps the miner to warp scramble them, the -10 players warp to scout, dogpile on the miner, and everyone dies, except the bumper, who then scoops loot.

Extremely effective - and has been happening for most of Eve's history, just never at these levels.

This calls into question the intention and integrity of Security Status as a game mechanic if it's actually effective. It's intention was to stop pilots from flying around -10 blowing up other players in high sec... but in this day in Eve it's not actually stopping them. Eventually players who go -5 are, in theory, not allowed to fly around high sec. This is their punishment for not playing nice. But in this case there are no punishments - they will just refit into another ship and come back again to gank someone else.

I do not understand how avoiding ship destruction by avoiding Concord after an act of aggression is considered an exploit but avoiding ship destruction from various NPC patrols of pilots currently banned from high sec isn't.

Whatever happened to the days where players who went -10 got their sec status back up in order to gank someone?

So in closing, I think that bumping is not only about harassment, but about avoiding aggression (and I do not have a recommended solution, just making a point) and that I do not believe that Security Status matters for these low risk/high reward ganks of passive players in Eve.

I am not in favor of making everyone 100% safe in high sec nor am I offering any suggestions or advice on changing anything. I am only pointing out somethings that I see as a potential issue. This can only get worse.... can you imagine the extortion + Hulkageddon?


Thank you for your time if you read this entire post.

Khaos Wildfire

TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.





Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
#230 - 2013-07-23 17:07:33 UTC
Khaos Wildfire wrote:


TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.


You are confusing two different things. Bumping as an alternative to warp scrambling is related to freighter ganking which this thread is not about. Miner ganking rarely (maybe never) involves bumping of the target.

Instead there is usually a scout ship that positions itself right next to the miner, who, being an afking botter, does not respond like a person would and continues to melt rock or ice. Then, the ganker, either a fleet or solo, leaves station, instawarps to a bookmark and then warps to the scout. Landing on top of the oblivious target the ganker then locks, fires and confiscates the illegal mining equipment. The pod too if there is time before CONCORD arrives. The ganker then warps his pod to station, grabs a noob ship, leaves station and pulls CONCORD to him, clearing the belt for the next event. If at any time the ganker pauses in this chain, faction police show up and ruin the whole thing. Or the group of players collectively known as "vultures" disrupt it at some point, of which there are several particularly vulnerable.

See any bumping in there? No, because there isn't any.

Bumping involves using fast but massive ships to separate miners from their mineral or ice targets. It is done repeatedly because, miners being a rather stubborn and unimaginative bunch, it takes a while for them to realize that we bumpers MEAN it when we say they have to buy a permit and follow The Code or no mining for them.... This whole issue arose because the miners were unwilling to either just do what we say or take any of the several but not extremely pleasant options they had to stop us. So, being carebears they demanded CCP fix it for them.

In this thread CCP said no. sort of.

Highsec is worth fighing for.

BBB

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#231 - 2013-07-23 22:36:19 UTC
Khaos Wildfire wrote:
TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.


Security status has not ever been a mechanism for keeping you safe. It is a mechanism for telling the faction police who to hunt.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#232 - 2013-07-25 22:12:08 UTC
Good stance on this CCP! I take special acceptance to the "case by case" attitude because some miner bumping is going to happen, and rightfully so, for all you afk and/or macro miners out there. I, as I am sure you all have seen where some people take it too far with the bumping to a level where it does seem like harassment.

Drops Mic

Haramir Haleths
Nutella Bande
#233 - 2013-07-26 14:43:34 UTC
Bumping is bad game mechanic roleplaying wise.
Spaceships shouldn't bump without any damage.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#234 - 2013-07-26 17:12:01 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Haramir Haleths wrote:
Bumping is bad game mechanic roleplaying wise.
Spaceships shouldn't bump without any damage.



So which option do you prefer?

CONCORD does the ganking of Freighters for us
or
Ganking in HS no longer requires you to lose your ship.


Because, depending on whether or not bumping damage counts as aggression, those are the possible results.


(As for lolRP, shields act as buffers > no damage as the collisions aren't sufficiently energetic)

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

ELWhappo Sanchez
#235 - 2013-08-05 01:41:40 UTC
ccp can fix this if they wanted to.
just make the bumper bounce off if the other ship is mining.
that way no other game play would be effected ie gates and undocks.
harassing and griefing miners by bumping should be gone from the game.
no reason for ccp to not fix it.
Laurianne Leone
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2013-08-06 00:03:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Laurianne Leone
ELWhappo Sanchez wrote:
ccp can fix this if they wanted to.
just make the bumper bounce off if the other ship is mining.
that way no other game play would be effected ie gates and undocks.
harassing and griefing miners by bumping should be gone from the game.
no reason for ccp to not fix it.


But they don't want to fix it and are (I speculate) enjoying seeing the conflict this behaviour sparks between players, now that you are actually playing the game rather than just alt tabbing and clicking a button once per hour harvesting Isk.

So read the op, digest it, then stop whining and deal with it.

Money ain't got no owners, only spenders RIP Omar Little 

ELWhappo Sanchez
#237 - 2013-08-07 03:27:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ELWhappo Sanchez
miner bumping is a broken game mechanic and the new order are just turds in the eve punch bowl plain and simple.
you can come in my wh any time and try to bump me honey.
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#238 - 2013-08-07 17:17:15 UTC
Making a ship that is currently mining an immovable object would backfire horribly. All the bad men would have to do is send in a few rookie ships with their civilian mining lasers, form up around your barge and start mining.... suddenly you cannot move. I think we know what happens shortly thereafter, yes?

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

ELWhappo Sanchez
#239 - 2013-08-07 23:48:22 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Making a ship that is currently mining an immovable object would backfire horribly. All the bad men would have to do is send in a few rookie ships with their civilian mining lasers, form up around your barge and start mining.... suddenly you cannot move. I think we know what happens shortly thereafter, yes?


same thing that always happens I pull out my salvage drones and salvage there wrecks just like I always do.
Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#240 - 2013-08-08 13:51:59 UTC
Haramir Haleths wrote:
Bumping is bad game mechanic roleplaying wise.
Spaceships shouldn't bump without any damage.


I think that would cause an issue at the busy hubs. Even if it did cause damage, it would just scratch the shields a bit. In the long run I dont think the work required to patch this into existence would be worth the change to the game mechanics.

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment