EVE General Discussion

Yes, it makes perfect sense - that's how EVE works. That is the game mechanics.

If you have a better way of doing it - make a really good write up with a fix that would not introduce tons of un-intended side effects (and good luck with that, in a game like EVE that is harder then you may think... Even CCP has issues with it, remember ESS units being deployed in W-space for extra lulz?), head over to "Features and Ideas discussion" and post it up.

You're also leaving out part of the story. During that 15 mins we kept that Orca bumped, he could have gotten away. All he needed was some corp mates or friends to get his back and come help him out - in fact, one single friend or corp mate acting as scout would have prevented him from jumping into the system in the first place.

But, he did none of this. He just went on auto with billions and billions of ISK in shiny things and flew right into a damn war zone. Literally, one friend scouting a jump ahead of him would have saved him. Of course, he would need to be at the keyboard in the first place.

You're also refusing to admit that there is a valid counter to bumping. I'm not going to spell it out to you, but I will say that it does involve being at keyboard and having friends/corp mates.

*Edit: Also, that Orca had some pretty sick loot too :) *

This was too great to pass up.


Please demonstrate how a price increase in necessarily bad. Without demand for ships there would be no need to produce ships. Margins on barges, t1 industrials, t1 freighters, catalysts an taloses would be nearly zero. Thrashers and Tornados would also take a hit, though they have more usages that do not involve high sec aggression.

Except that the good indie players find methods to minimize these losses, and excel in the market where the bad ones lose. They can use any of the techniques mentioned in this thread to get ahead. I really shouldn't have to list all of those here.

The good indy players realize that their competition is losing more to ganks than they are. At this point they realize that supplying gankers can actually turn them a profit and put pressure on competitors. Win/Win.

Price of goods increasing is not the same thing as inflation. Price increases are not necessarily good or bad, and in this case they reward good players while punishing bad ones.

Now I know that I haven't brushed up on economics recently, but please try to do a better job in the future, and for gods sake LEARN WHAT INFLATION MEANS.

The purpose of this thread is not relevant when a developer tells you repeatedly "too bad, working as intended."

You don't get to "suggest improvements", they aren't wanted. You don't get to make criticisms, they are wrong by default. You don't get safety without putting in effort for it, and that is working as fully intended.

You lose. You get nothing.

Deal with it.

Wrong. Once CONCORD arrives, the attackers ships are supposed to be *mostly* disabled. That does not, in any way, imply that you are safe. For example, a properly fit smartbombing battleship can keep smartbombing until the CONCORD battleship takes the infinite damage shot some 10s after arriving on grid.

Bumping does not, in fact, achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling.



Notice the difference between what Falcon said and what you are saying. He says that their role (providing a reactive deterrent) is *like* the role of a police force. You are saying that CONCORD *is* a police force.

"is Like" and "Are" mean very, very different things.



CONCORD has absolutely zero investigative roles. They simply react to any illegal aggression.
(Also, Gankers usually pull CONCORD off the scene immediately after the gank attempt, so they're not actually sitting there while the target gets bumped, and they'll definitely be pulled off the scene before the next gank attempt.)

And finally, the target absolutely can escape.

If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock.

Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene.

This would obviously make the game worse.

Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec."

I do this as someone who has never lost a hauler to a highsec suicide gank (in fact my only suicide gank loss to date has been a 4 million or so isk probe). I would just like the game to work as intended, and to provide the appropriate level of protection in highsec.

In other words, you are complaining about something you have no knowledge of whatsoever.
You are suggesting changes to game mechanics you don't understand.
You are complaining about situations that don't actually exist.
You are making claims based on hearsay, and keep repeating them in spite of them being 100% false.
You are making judgement on events that have never happened.

It is. You have not offered even the slightest hint of evidence that it doesn't.
You have even gone so far as to suggest that the devs are wrong; that their saying it is working as intended is incorrect; that their judgement on what is ok and what isn't must change.

You don't have a leg to stand on, and you know it. Everyone knows it. It's been known for years before you even started making your uninformed and nonsensical rants about things you have no clue of.

To be fair, spatial awareness is exactly what you need to get out of a bump situation.

And again our two favorite nullsec supporters appear on the scene to troll and derail any thread that might suggest some kind of reasonable and fair level of protection for players in highsec.