These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A Message Regarding "Hyperdunking"

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#341 - 2015-01-28 17:04:36 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Annette Nolen wrote:
Bumping simply needs a mechanical counter so that it's not a black and white, all or nothing experience.
It already has a number of them. All bumping does is change your velocity vector. You can approach this in two main ways: try to change it back or try to roll with it. Rolling with it generally means warping out in a direction other that the one you intended, but at least warping out. Once you're off the grid, you're pretty much home safe. The other is to use things like counter-bumps or webs or other external means to get you pointing in the right direction at the right speed. A more violent option is to simply gank the bumper. Given the setups for those ships, this is fairly easy but obviously comes at a cost.

Again, the only thing that isn't a counter is “do nothing” — the option most seem to go for for some unknowable reason. That will never, and should never, work.

And to just stave off the inevitable answer: no, just because these counters mostly rely on a second ship does not mean they are not viable counters. The hauler and his helper is countering the ganker and his helper — bumping without a gank is countered by simply ignoring it, so that's already a 1:1 option.



But a ship with a max speed of 55m/s should never be able to be bumped to 800m/s for any reason. Period

I don't even just mean for ganking, but there are other exploitable reasons why bumping should be at least limited to some reasonable multiple of your top speed. Also it should be noted that the mass/speed calculations should apply to bumping as they do aligning, which are way out of wack right now.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#342 - 2015-01-28 17:06:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Korwin Abre-Kai wrote:
the actual mechanics show that concord exists to protect the trade hubs and commerce between them in order to insure that a bare minimum functional economy exists in the game PERIOD no more no less. players as individuals are expendable , losses are expected and part of the game.
Not quite.

CONCORD exists to do one thing: to impose a tax on aggression in highsec (which is indeed the defining characteristic of highsec). That is all. You can either pay that tax piece-meal in assets (suicide gank) or wholesale in ISK (wardec). That is all CONCORD does and it is all it is: a cost.

CONCORD only offers protection in the form of a gamble: you are betting that other players' miserliness will be enough to keep them from blowing you up. You can skew that bet in or against your favour depending on what you fly, what you carry, and what people you annoy. As a basis, though, the odds are heavily in your favour and you can go through an entire highsec life without ever getting shot at because miserliness turns out to be a pretty strong motivation.

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But a ship with a max speed of 55m/s should never be able to be bumped to 800m/s for any reason. Period
Why not? It's not your engines propelling you so your max speed is not particularly relevant at that point, is it?

Oh, and mass does play a part in bumping, much like it does in acceleration.
Annette Nolen
Perkone
Caldari State
#343 - 2015-01-28 17:11:23 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Annette Nolen wrote:
Bumping simply needs a mechanical counter so that it's not a black and white, all or nothing experience.
It already has a number of them. All bumping does is change your velocity vector. You can approach this in two main ways: try to change it back or try to roll with it. Rolling with it generally means warping out in a direction other that the one you intended, but at least warping out. Once you're off the grid, you're pretty much home safe


I don't really want to pollute this thread with the responses; read the linked thread if you have suggestions, but I promise all of your points have been covered.

The only thing I wanted to address here is the assertion that you are home safe if you get into warp. Not even close... good bumpers will follow you and pin you again. And then pop you. Which is kinda fun honestly :) I have had a bumper screw up and put me in alignment with a station whereby I escape into a warp to 0 on said station (did not have an instadock BM), landed at about 500m, and was then successfully prevented from docking by the Mach that followed me (and was eventually ganked). Which was great... I bet the bumpers/gankers got a real thrill out of that one and I certainly enjoyed myself. There are several choices I could have made with my warp to outsmart them that I failed to do. That's real gameplay; both sides with non-zero chances of success once the encounter began.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#344 - 2015-01-28 17:16:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Korwin Abre-Kai wrote:
the actual mechanics show that concord exists to protect the trade hubs and commerce between them in order to insure that a bare minimum functional economy exists in the game PERIOD no more no less. players as individuals are expendable , losses are expected and part of the game.
Not quite.

CONCORD exists to do one thing: to impose a tax on aggression in highsec (which is indeed the defining characteristic of highsec). That is all. You can either pay that tax piece-meal in assets (suicide gank) or wholesale in ISK (wardec). That is all CONCORD does and it is all it is: a cost.

CONCORD only offers protection in the form of a gamble: you are betting that other players' miserliness will be enough to keep them from blowing you up. You can skew that bet in or against your favour depending on what you fly, what you carry, and what people you annoy. As a basis, though, the odds are heavily in your favour and you can go through an entire highsec life without ever getting shot at because miserliness turns out to be a pretty strong motivation.

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But a ship with a max speed of 55m/s should never be able to be bumped to 800m/s for any reason. Period
Why not? It's not your engines propelling you so your max speed is not particularly relevant at that point, is it?

Oh, and mass does play a part in bumping, much like it does in acceleration.


Mass calculations in bumping is a freaking joke in this game and you know it. Be better than that.

a 5mil ton ship can bump a giant frieghter 100x the mass over 15x its base speed.... that is OP and frankly not even close to lore if you want to play that card too.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#345 - 2015-01-28 17:16:54 UTC
Alli Ginthur wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
TheMeanPerson wrote:
Lets be serious here guys, I hate to be the debbie downer for freighter and industrial pilots, but no matter what happens.

If you fly with something worth ganking, your going to get ganked. Just be smart, dont go afk, use a webber. OTHERWISE, you will end up like the people inside of the player hugh forehead's biography EVERY TIME. WE will FIND you. Hyperdunking or not. Twisted



And what isnt worth ganking when you are using catalysts? before the problem was getting a fleet large enough to gank freighters with catalysts, now that problem is gone meaning that anyone with an alt or two can take down a freighter at a cost of what, 20m?

Yes, we can get escort, in the form of a webber or a guadian etc but that will double the cost of hauling and that cost will be passed along to the consumers. Also, it would delete this ganking gameplay that people seem to enjoy. Basically less fun for me, and for you.

Also, can we stop pretending that you are somehow immune to the freighter network being diminished? I mean the entire game runs on deliveries being made in freighters around the clock. It's also boring as **** and not especially profitable. So, how far do you want to push these people?



Wow.. when did the price of catalysts drop so much? Did you get a special deal? Mind letting me know your supplier? Roll

Heres a hint... the number of catalysts required didnt change. Only the number of people flying them and setting the gank up. Which is still more than the usual afk freighter pilot brings to the encounter.


Of course it didnt, why splurge on t2 fittings when you have all the time in the world? t1 fitted should be in the neighborhood of 2m each?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#346 - 2015-01-28 17:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Annette Nolen wrote:
I don't really want to pollute this thread with the responses; read the linked thread if you have suggestions, but I promise all of your points have been covered.
Including the one that you're asking for something that's already in the game?

Quote:
The only thing I wanted to address here is the assertion that you are home safe if you get into warp. Not even close... good bumpers will follow you and pin you again. And then pop you.
Bumpers don't pop you, so no. Your idea also breaks the physics engine for no real reason. The fact of the matter is that your suggestion tries to fix something that is problem solely because you make it one by adding something with the potential to completely unbalance the game. Your unwillingness to use the multiple counters that exist is not a good reason to break things willy-nilly.

Quote:
There is no perfect avoidance technique
This is a good thing. You want one to exist. That is a bad thing. That's as simple as it gets.


Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Mass calculations in bumping is a freaking joke in this game and you know it. Be better than that.
Suck it up, sunshine. You attempted to use a moronic simile and once again, reality came crashing down on you. It was your joke, and if you don't laugh at it, don't pull it out.

The fact of the matter is that what you want is once again already in the game. Here's another fact: bumping isn't OP since it's fairly easy to counter if you choose to. As always, choosing “do nothing” is not, will not, and should not be a solution.
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#347 - 2015-01-28 17:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Zendon Taredi
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit. Alternatively a built-in passive tank corresponding to 500 dps on every capital hauling ship.
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#348 - 2015-01-28 17:28:05 UTC
Zendon Taredi wrote:
Alli Ginthur wrote:


Wow.. when did the price of catalysts drop so much? Did you get a special deal? Mind letting me know your supplier? Roll

Heres a hint... the number of catalysts required didnt change. Only the number of people flying them and setting the gank up. Which is still more than the usual afk freighter pilot brings to the encounter.


Of course it didnt, why splurge on t2 fittings when you have all the time in the world? t1 fitted should be in the neighborhood of 2m each?


And would require the same number of t1 fit catalysts to kill either in the normal fleet attempt, or this hyperdunk attempt, and may even take more with just the one pilot moving back and forth... so all that really changes is the time involved, which is way greater for the hyperdunker... so im still failing to see how the gank attempt costs less now than before...
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#349 - 2015-01-28 17:28:33 UTC
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit. Alternatively a built-in passive tank corresponding to 500 dps on every capital hauling ship.

Why is any of that needed?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#350 - 2015-01-28 17:29:48 UTC
Can I say I told you so yet?
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#351 - 2015-01-28 17:30:07 UTC
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit.



See thats the thing. I give mad props to ganker fleets who can organize 10 Tornados or Talos and can pop a hauler the right way. Those guys have to set up, scan out and determine the risk/reward of the gank.

But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#352 - 2015-01-28 17:30:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit. Alternatively a built-in passive tank corresponding to 500 dps on every capital hauling ship.

Why is any of that needed?


That is up for CCP to decide.
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#353 - 2015-01-28 17:31:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Can I say I told you so yet?


Yes you can, over and over.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#354 - 2015-01-28 17:31:56 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.

Everything in the game can fight back against one guy in a Catalyst.

Zendon Taredi wrote:
That is up for CCP to decide.
So it's not needed, then, since that's what they just decided.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#355 - 2015-01-28 17:32:18 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit.



See thats the thing. I give mad props to ganker fleets who can organize 10 Tornados or Talos and can pop a hauler the right way. Those guys have to set up, scan out and determine the risk/reward of the gank.

But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.


Just as much planning goes into the gank, the amount of isk spent means nothing.
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#356 - 2015-01-28 17:33:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.

Everything in the game can fight back against one guy in a Catalyst.

Zendon Taredi wrote:
That is up for CCP to decide.
So it's not needed, then, since that's what they just decided.



Well, i do believe they will regret that.
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#357 - 2015-01-28 17:33:49 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit.



See thats the thing. I give mad props to ganker fleets who can organize 10 Tornados or Talos and can pop a hauler the right way. Those guys have to set up, scan out and determine the risk/reward of the gank.

But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.


And the difference between one guy using the 50mil of catalysts and the fleet using 50mil of catalysts is... what?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#358 - 2015-01-28 17:33:54 UTC
Zendon Taredi wrote:

Well, i do believe they will regret that.


Why?
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#359 - 2015-01-28 17:34:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.

Everything in the game can fight back against one guy in a Catalyst.

Zendon Taredi wrote:
That is up for CCP to decide.
So it's not needed, then, since that's what they just decided.


How does a freighter fight back? How many locked targets can it have?

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#360 - 2015-01-28 17:35:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Zendon Taredi wrote:
Well, i do believe they will regret that.
There's no reason to believe they will. After all, changing nothing is not a sufficient reason to suddenly nerf the hell out of an entire play style.

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
How does a freighter fight back? How many locked targets can it have?
By flying forwards and having more HP than the Catalyst can deliver before it dies. No target locks required.