These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#661 - 2015-01-23 00:18:59 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:

Tell me more, I'm curious Roll


Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.

Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#662 - 2015-01-23 15:25:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Tim Timpson wrote:
I was under the impression this was already a rule. If you bumped someone for a significant amount of time without attempting to gank them I'm pretty sure if it was reported GMs would intervene and am certain I've read that somewhere written by a GM or dev.
The official word as it stands is as follows (emphasis mine):

Taken from the opening post of this thread.
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

Which leads to the following post, where GM Karidor clarifies an effort to move on to another location.
Quote:
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)

Quote:
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.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.

Ebola IV
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#663 - 2015-01-24 07:31:20 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ebola IV wrote:

Tell me more, I'm curious Roll


Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.

Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.


This would apply, if the system doesn't/can't decide between bumper and bumpee. Thats true. But as I already said: My suggestion would need a proper implementation which actually CAN decide between the former and the latter. If it can't, it fails and would make ganking even easier than it's now ;)
Ebola IV
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#664 - 2015-01-24 07:34:07 UTC
Kairos Antilles wrote:
I just can't believe this discussion is still a 'thing'.


cool story bro...
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#665 - 2015-01-24 10:15:07 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ebola IV wrote:

Tell me more, I'm curious Roll


Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.

Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.


This would apply, if the system doesn't/can't decide between bumper and bumpee. Thats true. But as I already said: My suggestion would need a proper implementation which actually CAN decide between the former and the latter. If it can't, it fails and would make ganking even easier than it's now ;)
So...
How do you propose the system distinguishes between bumper and bumpee?

Bearing in mind that at least 50% of bumps are random accidents.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.

Solonius Rex
F0RCED ENTRY
NullSechnaya Sholupen
#666 - 2015-01-25 16:55:00 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ebola IV wrote:

Tell me more, I'm curious Roll


Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.

Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.


This would apply, if the system doesn't/can't decide between bumper and bumpee. Thats true. But as I already said: My suggestion would need a proper implementation which actually CAN decide between the former and the latter. If it can't, it fails and would make ganking even easier than it's now ;)


Wouldnt an autopilot ship continuously bump a stationary ship in its path? Wouldnt it be clear who is doing the bumping, in such a situation? And wouldnt that provide the easiest kill, ever, to the stationary ship?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#667 - 2015-01-26 14:25:02 UTC
Ebola IV wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ebola IV wrote:

Tell me more, I'm curious Roll


Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.

Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.


This would apply, if the system doesn't/can't decide between bumper and bumpee. Thats true. But as I already said: My suggestion would need a proper implementation which actually CAN decide between the former and the latter. If it can't, it fails and would make ganking even easier than it's now ;)


They can't even add alliance bookmarks, what makes you think they can possibly recode the game's base physics engine from the ground up?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Lord Parallax
Valkyrie Guardians
#668 - 2015-02-18 17:36:47 UTC
SO as I have interrupted the vagueness of this "miner-bumping" I can now freely bump a player for as long as I deem fit as long as they stay within my "operational area" given I am a roamer with no general location to call home my "operational area" could be an entire empire or the entire game and technically would mean I can follow this person anywhere in the game as it is my " operational area". They would have to endure my "miner-bumping" that would eventually lead to them being ganked as I am bumping them to prevent them from being able to warp away and all though I didn't aggress I ensured them to technically be "tackled" on grind allowing the gankers to destroy the person I have been bumping for IDK 40 systems ( since I consider myself to be a roaming pirate).

Thanks for pretty much saying miner-bumping is legal and we wont get in trouble for it at all.......still....

Long live JAMES315. and his supporters.............................. TOP KEK


Aodan OfClanBrien
#669 - 2015-03-01 14:08:58 UTC
" We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics."

bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem
Sylphy
TSOE Po1ice
TSOE Consortium
#670 - 2015-03-04 08:42:23 UTC
Is ti normal that I can bump my deployed Rorqual into movement while it's industrial core is running? By trying to warp through it with an Occator? Is that part of the emergent gameplay that I have to cycle down the industrial core and reposition my Rorqual because the hauler can't arrive more accurately to a bookmark.

Why not make a skill that improves accuracy when arriving to the bookmark?

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

Drez Arthie
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#671 - 2015-03-26 01:36:02 UTC
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
" We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics."

bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem


It is emergent gameplay, that's not the question. It's where do you draw the line between player interaction and player harassment? I think there is no need to restrict players' ability to interfere with each other, but there should be more ability for those interefered with to respond. If you bump a miner, and then bump him when he comes back to the asteroid, and then bump him five times more, he should get klll rights or something. The miner might be totally risk averse and do nothing, but then again he might decide this is a great chance to fight back and buy a Proteus and hunt you down.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#672 - 2015-04-06 23:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
Drez Arthie wrote:
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
" We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics."

bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem


It is emergent gameplay, that's not the question. It's where do you draw the line between player interaction and player harassment? I think there is no need to restrict players' ability to interfere with each other, but there should be more ability for those interefered with to respond. If you bump a miner, and then bump him when he comes back to the asteroid, and then bump him five times more, he should get klll rights or something. The miner might be totally risk averse and do nothing, but then again he might decide this is a great chance to fight back and buy a Proteus and hunt you down.

Kill rights are for criminals.

The frustrated local bumping a selfish multiboxer is not a criminal. The criminal is the multiboxer taking all the ore within a few hours of downtime every single day.

Bumping does not need reworking. It only affects dumb pilots or large mining fleets hogging resources. It's easy for a solo miner to avoid being bumped but it's very disruptive against large mining fleets. It's easy for a solo freighter pilot to web sling into warp but it's very disruptive to the freighters supporting large mining fleets.

Working as intended.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin

Dana Goodeye
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#673 - 2015-04-12 11:43:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Dana Goodeye
well... this bumping effect is just silly, oki? a ruiser collide with a bs high speed, none of them got damaged, but its not enough, the bs gonna gain speed... its just silly. like when i cant warp, because an acceleration gate"bumping" me out of alligment, or an asteroid, and i got pointed, but i cant use them as a cover when i get shot. ccp, make these things uncollidable, or make us able to use them as cover against bullets, missiles -.- my frigs would like that :) and one more thing... in my opinion, if one or more ppl bumping me lets say 3 times, and this is one ppl, or they are in fleet, or same corp or alliance, it would be nice to get a duel invite from them automatically, but my fleet, corp and alliance could be ... i dont know the word for it... participate? well, if i would accept a bumping duel like this, my alliance corp and fleetmates would be able to shoot them too. think about it... escorting haulers in hisec would be a thing... it would be awesomeee =D ccp make it happen or i will bump you to death -.-
Aodan OfClanBrien
#674 - 2015-04-20 19:46:36 UTC
Drez Arthie wrote:
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
" We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics."

bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem


It is emergent gameplay, that's not the question. It's where do you draw the line between player interaction and player harassment? I think there is no need to restrict players' ability to interfere with each other, but there should be more ability for those interefered with to respond. If you bump a miner, and then bump him when he comes back to the asteroid, and then bump him five times more, he should get klll rights or something. The miner might be totally risk averse and do nothing, but then again he might decide this is a great chance to fight back and buy a Proteus and hunt you down.



I agree with your comment,when I wrote my comment I was exacerbated by what I perceived as a lazy answer to a problem in-game. I was seeing (in a high sec ice mining belt), a player who (clearly) has multiple alts, was using a skiff to scout the belt, bumping from the ice (newbie miners in their retrievers) using a Machariel, while watching people going to a fro from the only station in system in a tengu.Clearly the miners can't compete against a Machariel or a tengu and the bumping was pure harassment and greifing. I agree with bumping to gain some sort of tactical advantage in a fight ie bumping somebody away from a gate before they jump, but what i am seeing is just nasty and spitefull behavour against newbros (who are not afking) trying to mine ice as a change from veldspar.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#675 - 2015-04-20 20:15:04 UTC
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
Drez Arthie wrote:
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
" We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics."

bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem


It is emergent gameplay, that's not the question. It's where do you draw the line between player interaction and player harassment? I think there is no need to restrict players' ability to interfere with each other, but there should be more ability for those interefered with to respond. If you bump a miner, and then bump him when he comes back to the asteroid, and then bump him five times more, he should get klll rights or something. The miner might be totally risk averse and do nothing, but then again he might decide this is a great chance to fight back and buy a Proteus and hunt you down.



I agree with your comment,when I wrote my comment I was exacerbated by what I perceived as a lazy answer to a problem in-game. I was seeing (in a high sec ice mining belt), a player who (clearly) has multiple alts, was using a skiff to scout the belt, bumping from the ice (newbie miners in their retrievers) using a Machariel, while watching people going to a fro from the only station in system in a tengu.Clearly the miners can't compete against a Machariel or a tengu and the bumping was pure harassment and greifing. I agree with bumping to gain some sort of tactical advantage in a fight ie bumping somebody away from a gate before they jump, but what i am seeing is just nasty and spitefull behavour against newbros (who are not afking) trying to mine ice as a change from veldspar.

What more do you want? CCP has already provided two mining ships, the Procurer and the Skiff (four if you count the mining frigates) that are effectively immune to bumping if actively piloted.

Eve is a competitive PvP sandbox game where players compete for power and resources. I fail to see how it is nasty or spiteful to try to outcompete your fellow players for a limited resource like an ice field even using an emergent gameplay tool like bumping. Playing the game as designed is not "pure harassment" or "griefing" by any stretch of these definitions, especially when you are directly competing for a resources and when CCP has given you several tools to avoid the bumpers.
Solecist Project
#676 - 2015-04-23 10:13:01 UTC
*bumps into Black Pedro*

*lawsuit for sexual harassment incoming*

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#677 - 2015-04-24 15:00:35 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

What more do you want?


You know perfectly well what they want.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#678 - 2015-04-29 16:40:30 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:

What more do you want?


You know perfectly well what they want.


Cake?
Leto Thule
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#679 - 2015-05-07 00:43:53 UTC
Dana Goodeye wrote:
well... this bumping effect is just silly, oki? a ruiser collide with a bs high speed, none of them got damaged, but its not enough, the bs gonna gain speed... its just silly. like when i cant warp, because an acceleration gate"bumping" me out of alligment, or an asteroid, and i got pointed, but i cant use them as a cover when i get shot. ccp, make these things uncollidable, or make us able to use them as cover against bullets, missiles -.- my frigs would like that :) and one more thing... in my opinion, if one or more ppl bumping me lets say 3 times, and this is one ppl, or they are in fleet, or same corp or alliance, it would be nice to get a duel invite from them automatically, but my fleet, corp and alliance could be ... i dont know the word for it... participate? well, if i would accept a bumping duel like this, my alliance corp and fleetmates would be able to shoot them too. think about it... escorting haulers in hisec would be a thing... it would be awesomeee =D ccp make it happen or i will bump you to death -.-


Please god no. Cover? This isn't an FPS.

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

Nomis Alexander
Haldskel Corporation
Ushra'Khan
#680 - 2015-05-10 22:02:34 UTC
Aodan OfClanBrien wrote:
bumping is toxic to the game play within Eve online, writing it off as "emergent gameplay" is just a lazy way of dealing with a problem


Miner, calm down. Nobody ever got poisoned off a bump, at least not the last time I checked.