These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ressiv
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#241 - 2013-08-24 21:22:30 UTC
ELWhappo Sanchez wrote:

you can come in my wh any time and try to bump me honey.


...this sounds soo f-ing wrong Shocked
Charlie Reed
Doomheim
#242 - 2013-08-26 03:42:26 UTC
Loren Torvald wrote:
bump


bump
Sylphy
TSOE Po1ice
TSOE Consortium
#243 - 2013-09-16 11:41:25 UTC
All that needs be done is that "bumping" is removed from the game and realistic damage on ramming/impact is introduced.

Let's envisage you in a a Brutix bumping my freighter? If mechanics were done properly, it wouldn't be happening. EVER. The Brutix would, ofcourse impact the hull of the freighter without the freighter even noticing it's presence.

What is currently in the game, isn't bumping. It's automatic avoidance between two possible collidible objects and re-establishing safe distance. If I warp to a bookmark that's technically inside an asteroid, I should splat on it's surface. Not bounce away from it 120km away as if my ship was a gumball.

I'll let each and every person in this thread, try to alter an oil tankers path by hitting it with a rowboat. Be my guest.

The character does not represent the views/opinions of its Corporation or Alliance.

Kasenumi Aakiwa
Doomheim
#244 - 2013-09-22 18:02:45 UTC
People really like to complain, no matter how.

Bumping is the most insignificant event a person can do, unless it is in a "harassment manner", it will only affect those doing what it would affect IRL as well. Should you want "God " to remove bumping because you daydream stading in door people want to pass ?

About reality, in reality there is no such thing as shields like eve has, and no nano whatever like eve has, and no space travel like eve has, but how it can be theoretically postulated, there is a consistent way in which one ship bump in another without damaging if they are developed in such a way, and that would also explain how a shield can prevent damage types em waves actually cant according to IRL science.

Let the bumping go and afkers go afk themselves in another universe.
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#245 - 2013-10-05 20:37:05 UTC
From what I understand, bumping a freighter off of a gate is perfectly acceptable. Especially if you do not follow it to another system. Sure, you might sit at the spot where the freighter logged out, but this would not really be harassment, as you stayed within the same system instead of chasing them. And they are not stuck either, and can leave whenever they want, assuming they are willing to eject. It could be a business plan if you started ransoming them as well.

Food for thought.

Thufir Bezluden
Doomheim
#246 - 2013-10-07 04:20:43 UTC
Oh the old days of Long Limbed Roe runs and no warp to zero.

Best thing on earth was to find a nice hauler mining away and set BM 15km away, then get into just the right position and warp to BM at 15. Hauler would get punted 100km or more away -took some skill to pull it off. If miners sit still, they are begging for bumping, but trying to mine while moving is just a pain in the ass.

Please reintroduce Punting because it affected entire fleets dropping out of warp. Nothing like having a quarter of your fleet go shooting off and have to mwd or warp back to gate for jump.
Aiyana Bayushi
Miners in Pink
#247 - 2013-10-18 23:53:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiyana Bayushi
GM Karidor wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
I simply noted that it seems that it is still legal to implicitly harass someone by setting up bumper gangs in every belt that one person mines in, as long as they target everyone, not just that one individual. Or am I mistaken here?


You are mistaken. If you are reported and we find you actively following around a target without a war to continue bumping a specific player, it will still (at some point) considered harassment, even if you divert your 'attention' a little while doing so. If you have a bone to pick with someone, declare a war and take the risk that your target may actually taste blood and fight back (or finds allies for that part).

Runeme Shilter wrote:
GM Karidor wrote:
However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.


Does "move to another location" mean another Ice-Asteroid? Or another belt? Another system?

RS


While it will involve inconvenience, we will have to see that one actively tried evasion before we consider someone being followed around and harassed. Merely changing belts in the same system or moving a few thousand meters to another asteroid would not qualify in this regard. Ideally you would move to other systems and more than just one or two jumps to avoid being found again quickly, requiring some effort to locate you again (i.e. through locator agents).

Benny Ohu wrote:
if a bumper was extorting in a system, then later moved to another system and bumped a player that had previously moved on, not because the bumper was following the other player but because the other player was in the bumper's new area, is that a situation that 'by itself' is harassment?


Depends, see the answer to the quote above which should cover this as well. If the victim just moved next door, that could still be interpreted as 'general area of operation', if the miner starts changing regions and is still being followed around by the same person that keeps bumping in a regular manner then the intent is pretty clear. Note that I said person, not character, so regional alts will be considered be the same player in this regard.




So bumping someone off grid then demanding payment or you will continue to bump them or gank them is a legal action? is that not harassment by this definition since the victim would have to declare war themselves to stop the bumping or pay a fee and would member of the same corp/alliance/group working together count? IE driving people out of a area via bumping and ganking without declaring war?
Anne Dieu-le-veut
Natl Assn for the Advancement of Criminal People
#248 - 2013-10-23 14:05:13 UTC
Aiyana Bayushi wrote:
So bumping someone off grid then demanding payment or you will continue to bump them or gank them is a legal action?


Seems pretty clear the answer is "yes".

Aiyana Bayushi wrote:
is that not harassment by this definition since the victim would have to declare war themselves to stop the bumping or pay a fee and would member of the same corp/alliance/group working together count? IE driving people out of a area via bumping and ganking without declaring war?


Seems pretty clear the answer is "no". What's so confusing about the GM replies?
Sally Enviere
#249 - 2013-10-27 03:10:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Sally Enviere
I think that PvP bumping should completly be removed from the game. It's an exploit... Bumping slower ships with already long aligning times can prevent them from warping with or without any wardec of yellow flags. This means you can limit a player's movement for hours if you want. Logging off means the solution, but that also limits a player in free movement. There are some exploits around this, so I think, much headache could be spared if PvP bumping would be removed.

For those who gank miners... Aren't miners the ones who dig rocks to sell the minerals that you ships are built by? If you gank all miners in EvE, than you can fly with your pods, smile and bump each other.
Why doesn't you PvP enjoying guy shoot each other? Or shoot something that shoots back? Miers are usually guys with low skills, and not much experience in EVE. If you gank them, then they will say: "OMG, EVE sucks!" and leave the game for good. Instead I have a better idea: teach them how to PvP, and on one day they might join you in roaming, and have fun together.

Nowadays corps wardec smaller mining corps just for the killboards, and use all their dirty tactics to achieve kills. Usually on miners who does not even have the chance to defend themselves. I think, this is becoming a trend nowadays, and I'm pretty sure that many people would consider leaveing EVE because of this, it's not becoming about having fun, but causing other players losses, some losses that they can't recover, or just in long time.

I'm sure, after this post, many you minerganker guys will call me a whining miner, but I would say to those peeps to try it on the other side. Even I could bust some lonely miners in lowsec who mine alone, but I didn't, because I know what it's like being killed without the chance to defend myself. Many of you don't know what honorable combat is... Not even to shoot on something that can shoot back...
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#250 - 2013-10-27 03:26:53 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Sally Enviere wrote:
I think that PvP bumping should completly be removed from the game. It's an exploit... Bumping slower ships with already long aligning times can prevent them from warping with or without any wardec of yellow flags. This means you can limit a player's movement for hours if you want. Logging off means the solution, but that also limits a player in free movement.


Why shouldn't someone be able to limit your movement if they choose to put effort into doing so and you choose not to stop them?

Quote:
Even I could bust some lonely miners in lowsec who mine alone, but I didn't, because I know what it's like being killed without the chance to defend myself. Many of you don't know what honorable combat is... Not even to shoot on something that can shoot back...



Ouch, got me right in the internet space bushido.


Incidentally, how did the banner ads telling you to "Be the Villain" not clue you into the type of game you were joining up to play?

"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

Sally Enviere
#251 - 2013-10-27 03:39:59 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


Why shouldn't someone be able to limit your movement if they choose to put effort into doing so and you choose not to stop them?


I accept that if it happens within the rules of the game, by webifiers or warp scrams/distruptors, but not by bumping. That has no reaction that the game mechanism can respond with. And why shouldn't? Because this is not a jail. I like to play hide and seek when I have room to move, at least one step.
In this game everything has a countermove to respond with. Bumping doesn't. So on one side player A who wants to catch another does something, like scramming, then player B uses stabs to prevent A from catching, then A equips more scrams, and so on, the chances are equal. When being bumped, B can do nothing but log off to prevent A from escaping.

RubyPorto wrote:
Ouch, got me right in the internet space bushido.

Yeah, usual reaciton. Just try that a few times when have no spare isk and ships, and it won't be funny after all..
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#252 - 2013-10-27 19:15:38 UTC
Sally Enviere wrote:
I accept that if it happens within the rules of the game, by webifiers or warp scrams/distruptors, but not by bumping. That has no reaction that the game mechanism can respond with. And why shouldn't? Because this is not a jail. I like to play hide and seek when I have room to move, at least one step.


Bumping is within the rules of the game. Just like any other video game, the mechanics are the rules.

Quote:
In this game everything has a countermove to respond with. Bumping doesn't.


Sure it does.

You're free to get a friend to counter bump them, you can log out, you can safe log out, you can eject (pods are effectively unbumpable), you can shoot them, you can get a friend to shoot them, you can get a friend to web you into warp before being bumped the first time. That's about a half dozen ways you can counter that one mechanic's ability to limit your movement off the top of my head.

Quote:
Yeah, usual reaciton. Just try that a few times when have no spare isk and ships, and it won't be funny after all..


This is why you don't fly what you can't afford to lose.

"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

Violet Crumble
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#253 - 2013-10-30 21:34:04 UTC
Sally Enviere wrote:
I think that PvP bumping should completly be removed from the game. It's an exploit... Bumping slower ships with already long aligning times can prevent them from warping with or without any wardec of yellow flags. This means you can limit a player's movement for hours if you want. Logging off means the solution, but that also limits a player in free movement. There are some exploits around this, so I think, much headache could be spared if PvP bumping would be removed.


It doesn't limit anything and shouldn't be removed.

You want to stop being bumped, fight back or warp away and find an alternative route. It's not difficult.

Quote:
For those who gank miners... Aren't miners the ones who dig rocks to sell the minerals that you ships are built by? If you gank all miners in EvE, than you can fly with your pods, smile and bump each other.


It's only the highsec miners that complain. There is plenty of mining going on in lowsec and nullsec that provide resources to build items for the market.

The difference between the highsec and lowsec/nullsec miners though is that the highsec miners have no real interaction with the game. They don't play the game to it's full extent. In many cases, that may be because they are new and haven't learnt all of the different ways to play Eve, so they play the most isolated, unengaged, lonely form of Eve there is.

A large section of gankers, and particularly the bumpers are interested in educating players, not really in bumping or ganking them. They'd be more than happy if the highsec miners chose to move to lowsec/nullsec or decided to learn pvp and fight back, perhaps moved to wormhole space - a whole host of things that result in greater knowledge and much greater interaction with other players. Eve is a social game and AFK mining is the most antisocial, anti-Eve way to play it.


Quote:
Why doesn't you PvP enjoying guy shoot each other? Or shoot something that shoots back? Miers are usually guys with low skills, and not much experience in EVE. If you gank them, then they will say: "OMG, EVE sucks!" and leave the game for good. Instead I have a better idea: teach them how to PvP, and on one day they might join you in roaming, and have fun together. Nowadays corps wardec smaller mining corps just for the killboards, and use all their dirty tactics to achieve kills. Usually on miners who does not even have the chance to defend themselves.


It's not about the shooting. It's about educating and it's not true that miners can't shoot back. They can and should. They're going to lose their mining ship anyway, so may as well shoot back or have some combat drones. Or better yet, start talking to othr players, get organised into a Corp, develop a plan of defense and actually implement it.

The most common response is to rage and make idol threats and continue playing the game AFK whenever they can get away with it. Boring.

Miners have the same choices as every other player in the game. They have access to the same tools and mechanics. So they have exactly the same chance to defend themselves as other players do.


Quote:
I think, this is becoming a trend nowadays, and I'm pretty sure that many people would consider leaveing EVE because of this, it's not becoming about having fun, but causing other players losses, some losses that they can't recover, or just in long time.


Ganks in highsec happen generally against two classes of player:

1. Players who are generally new to the game, but who've been playing long enough that they should have discvoered more depth to the game than mining in highsec, often AFK; and

2. players with a lot of experience in the game who are hauling valuable cargo through highsec, knowing they'll be at risk.

Group 2 know they may be ganked and don't rage when it happens. They know how the game works and they accept it and figure out what they need to do to avoid the situation in the future (and get revenge in the present in many cases).

Group 1 though are the one's ready to consider rage quitting the first time they are ganked, or file a petition so that someone else can be responsible for acting against the ganker. They don't accept their own responsibility for the situation and then work out how they can play the game to get what they want. They just winge and whine and try to get others to fix their situation.

If they want to quit, good riddance to them. They don't offer anything to the game to begin with, so it's no big loss (and despite claims that this will hurt CCPs bottom line, evidence of player numbers suggests this isn't true).

Quote:
I'm sure, after this post, many you minerganker guys will call me a whining miner, but I would say to those peeps to try it on the other side. Even I could bust some lonely miners in lowsec who mine alone, but I didn't, because I know what it's like being killed without the chance to defend myself. Many of you don't know what honorable combat is... Not even to shoot on something that can shoot back...


You have never been killed without the chance to defend yourself. Even in a pod you have choices and can always defend yourself - directly then, at a meta level, later in game. There are always options.

As for honorable combat - there's just combat. Honour doesn't come into it (except in the words in pop-up window when a duel takes place). You win, lose or run away before you lose. Each of them is acceptable and nothing to do with 'honor'. It's internet pixels, not RL.

Funtime Factory - We put the fun back in funtime

General Coochie
Lovers Rock
#254 - 2013-11-02 16:49:11 UTC
I bump along each and everyday baby.
Train To Zone
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#255 - 2013-11-16 22:24:21 UTC
Bumper boats is and always will be the dumbest mechanic in EVE. "Emergent gameplay" lol.

Naydra Adni
Doomheim
#256 - 2013-11-19 07:11:24 UTC
"A large section of gankers, and particularly the bumpers are interested in educating players, not really in bumping or ganking them. "
you're so full of s**t lol
Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#257 - 2013-11-21 02:55:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Sitting Bull Lakota
Time for a fresh faced convert to pvp's opinion. I present three scenarios and a chart of my own design.

Scenario #1
"A cruiser bumping an orca out of alignment to prevent it from warping off while waiting for tackle to get on grid."
All but the orca pilot and other victims of this tactic would agree that this is a brilliant use of gameplay mechanics for the furtherance of holy pew.

Scenario #2
"An army of catalysts swarming a freighter to push it away from the CONCORD blob during a freighter killing event."
While committed for the furtherance of holy pew, is a hazier use of the collision mechanic. It does require teamwork however and bringing such a ship down in high sec is a glorious feat no matter how it is accomplished.

Scenario #3
"A dread (or some ship) warping to zero on a fleet member sitting next to a pos shield with the intent of bumping a parked cap out of the shielded space."
This, I believe (third hand tales from old eve vets), was the tactic "Pos bowling" and was declared an exploit and bannable offense by CCP.

So on a scale of creative battle tactic to bannable offense where does miner bumping fall?

Tactic(0)----------1---------2----------3----------4----------5----------6----------7----------8----------9----------Exploit(10)
-------------------Bump--------------------------------------------------bump---------------------------------------------Bump
----------------an aligning----------------------------------------a freighter away--------------------------------Docked Caps
--------------escaping ship-----------------------------------from CONCORD/Gate------------------------Out of pos shield

I'm leaning towards placing it in the same category as the bumping tactic used by suicide gank fleets killing freighters, between 5 and at most 8. Very hazy stuff, but there is still no specific rule/game mechanic set in place to prevent it. It probably should be reviewed by CCP in more detail.

On the one hand, bumping miners, while annoying, is not as damaging as ganking them outright. It is easy enough to avoid a bumping when the bumping is not specifically directed at one character, just log/relog and relocate to some less turbulent system. (granted, a particularly teary mark will be searched out and bumped ad nauseum purely for the lulz)

On the other hand, bumping is in theory defeating Eve's philosophy of no action without reaction. Bumping for sport and especially bumping for tears and profit is probably too safe for the reward it provides to the bumper. It can't really be made a suspect offense, because places like Jita would become blood soaked lands of death (fun sounding, but probably not advisable). AND many mining ops would become fair targets to players looking to spread the joyous doctrine of holy pew to the peaceful systems of high sec (ala orca warps to zero on ice belt, bumps three retrievers, suddenly suspect flags everywhere).

Like I said above, this topic should probably be reviewed in more detail by CCP.

edit: I need to get out of this npc corp Bear
Nanatoa
#258 - 2013-11-21 23:49:42 UTC
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
Like I said above, this topic should probably be reviewed in more detail by CCP.


Reviewed in even more detail? You are aware that this very thread is the outcome of a week-long consultation of players followed by a two-month review by CCP?

"Stay the course, we have done this many times before." - (CCP) Hilmar, June 2011

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#259 - 2013-11-22 02:39:58 UTC
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
Like I said above, this topic should probably be reviewed in more detail by CCP.

edit: I need to get out of this npc corp Bear



A Detailed Review by CCP, as you asked.

"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

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#260 - 2013-11-23 18:34:06 UTC
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:


Like I said above, this topic should probably be reviewed in more detail by CCP.

edit: I need to get out of this npc corp Bear


Did you even read the thread? The very first post is the result of a 2 month review.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack