Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
|
GM Karidor
Game Masters C C P Alliance
844
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
On November 28th 2012, CCP Falcon created this thread on the Crime & Punishment Forum for the discussion of Miner Bumping with a view to clearing up any questions regarding the legitimacy of this type of gameplay.
The thread was closed on December 5th and the discussion regarding this tactic has been long and detailed. After speaking with Game Design and discussing the contents of the thread among themselves for quite some time, the GM Team has come to the following conclusion:
CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. 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.
We would also like to stress that if a gameplay activity is classified as being GÇ£within the rulesGÇ¥ this does not mean that we endorse, sanction or back player activity. We simply see this as emergent gameplay that has occurred due to the nature of game mechanics.
As such, any players who have any notes to this effect within their in game biographies should remove words of this nature immediately. GM Karidor | Senior Game Master |
|
|
CCP Falcon
2215
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
This thread will be left open for now, and all discussion regarding bumping will be diverted here.
Keep within the forum rules and stay on topic, and the thread will stay open.
Any attempts to derail discussion, any trolling, and any personal attacks will not be taken lightly. CCP Falcon -á || -á EVE Community Team -á || -á EVE Illuminati -á || -á Live Events Organizer
@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
317
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:This thread will be left open for now, and all discussion regarding bumping will be diverted here.
Keep within the forum rules and stay on topic, and the thread will stay open.
Any attempts to derail discussion, any trolling, and any personal attacks will not be taken lightly. Why did you remove my reply?
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? |
Runeme Shilter
New Order Logistics CODE.
30
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
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 |
BadAssMcKill
Ghost Headquarters The Ghost Army
99
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
That seems reasonable Starships were meant to fly~ |
tgl3
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
253
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 15:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pretty much what I expected, cheers for the response! Member of the EVE Blog Pack - Through Newb Eyes Twitter - TG_3 |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
755
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
does this mean that if a player does not attempt to change location that repeated bumping is not harassment?
i present that situation as 'by itself' i understand there are often other factors involved and that malicious intent is a consideration
this is more specific than your general ruling, but is repeated bumping of a player in an attempt to extort them 'by itself' harassment?
(i think we all know of the player organisation prompting this discussion and i think it'd be good to see a yay or a nay or some example situations rather than have players 'experimenting' near the ruling to see what passes)
assuming the above is ok, 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? |
Temmu Guerra
Genco Fatal Ascension
104
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
You guys could always go to another system... |
Kimo Khan
50
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:43:00 -
[9] - Quote
If said bumper is part of a gang which then proceed to gank me, why do I not get killrights on the bumper who prevented warp without using a scrambler and thus avoided invoking concord?
|
Jonah Gravenstein
The Burning Lotus
5220
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kimo Khan wrote: If said bumper is part of a gang which then proceed to gank me, why do I not get killrights on the bumper who prevented warp without using a scrambler and thus avoided invoking concord?
Because bumping is not, and never has been a flaggable action, more for practical means than anything else. Jita 4-4 undock with flaggable bumping would become a scrapyard FFA.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times, it's a goonspiracy. |
|
Runeme Shilter
New Order Logistics CODE.
30
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:48:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kimo Khan wrote: If said bumper is part of a gang which then proceed to gank me, why do I not get killrights on the bumper who prevented warp without using a scrambler and thus avoided invoking concord?
Because bumping is not an agressive or illegal action of course. It's not that hard.
RS |
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Good decision. |
Kimo Khan
50
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
You are missing my point. I know bumping is not a flaggable action in itself, but the scenario I mentioned is that it is combined with a flaggable action, just like Remote Repping is flagable only when you use it on a flagged person. So why would bumping when used with a criminal gank not be flaggable?
It is not a question to players, it is a question to CCP to consider. Bumping to prevent warp is a circumvention to the warp scram mechanic which flags a person. An easy solution to this issue is to prevent bumping to a person trying to warp, just turn off the mechanic when a person initiates warp. Its not like you can get bumped when you are in warp, so why not turn it off when you initiate warp. |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
543
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 16:57:00 -
[14] - Quote
The words are chosen wisely.
"Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
|
Lysantos Kelrus
Hikansog Tax Haven
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 17:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
now all we need to do is establish a proper high industry in protection services.
the market looks pretty profitable |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1472
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 17:51:00 -
[16] - Quote
makes sense. There should always be the option where certain player behavior can be interpreted as griefing from the GMs even though it does not break any rules. Thats why we have them instead of robots. a eve-style bounty system (done)-á dust boarding parties You fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Sulzer Wartzilla
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
5
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 17:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kimo Khan wrote:You are missing my point. I know bumping is not a flaggable action in itself, but the scenario I mentioned is that it is combined with a flaggable action, just like Remote Repping is flagable only when you use it on a flagged person. So why would bumping when used with a criminal gank not be flaggable?
It is not a question to players, it is a question to CCP to consider. Bumping to prevent warp is a circumvention to the warp scram mechanic which flags a person. An easy solution to this issue is to prevent bumping to a person trying to warp, just turn off the mechanic when a person initiates warp. Its not like you can get bumped when you are in warp, so why not turn it off when you initiate warp. Bumping ships to prevent warping (but mostly crashing back to stargates) has long been an integral and known part of PVP. It takes skill to actually bump someone trying to escape.
It's been around for years. Of course, once this tactic found its way to the asteroid belts of hisec, the calls for nerfing it or utterly removing it from the game did not wait long to rear their ugly face. Predictable. |
|
GM Karidor
Game Masters C C P Alliance
845
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 18:03:00 -
[18] - Quote
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. GM Karidor | Senior Game Master |
|
Runeme Shilter
New Order Logistics CODE.
31
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 18:24:00 -
[19] - Quote
GM Karidor wrote: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).
Thanks for the reply. That is a very wise and sensible ruling!
RS
|
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
543
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 18:28:00 -
[20] - Quote
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.
Do not get me wrong but that at least partly puts a lock on emergent gameplay and prospering buissnes models. There even were already growing some movements growing driven by miners to oppose so called bumpers. Minerbumping led to loners engeging in group activities to help themselves. Although the niveau might not have been especially high, the comunication between players in high sec also increased. The need for those movements that united in the sight of the common bumper-enemy decreases with this development. While more and more 0.0 alliances struggle to find enough industrialists or miners seeding their markets, high sec afk mining and botting is prosperous and florishes. Although the statement you made leaves a lot of space for interpretation and case sensitive treatment the general direction of the policy does not help any of the involved parties. I might be wrong but you sure will be flooded with petitions...worse than before. In the end the general tenor in the mentioned bumping thread seemed overall "pro-bumping" with only a few very loud and determined "anti-bumping" proponents...but that might be a thing of perception.
Finally I have to say that it is good that there is a position from CCP now. Now the terms can be discussed ;-)
"Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
|
|
Sulzer Wartzilla
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
6
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 18:33:00 -
[21] - Quote
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). On the surface of it, this seems reasonable, but what if said target is in an NPC corp? |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
192
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 19:00:00 -
[22] - Quote
what about bumping freighters out of grid, so they can gank and loot without being attacked by other players?
isn't that an exploit of the new crimewatch? |
Runeme Shilter
New Order Logistics CODE.
32
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 20:15:00 -
[23] - Quote
Red Frog Rufen wrote:what about bumping freighters out of grid, so they can gank and loot without being attacked by other players?
isn't that an exploit of the new crimewatch?
The other players can just follow the freighter to the next grid and shoot the suspects there... Why must always CCP provide protection/deem things an exploit? |
Johan March
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 20:19:00 -
[24] - Quote
This looks like a good decision. |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
192
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 20:22:00 -
[25] - Quote
Runeme Shilter wrote:Red Frog Rufen wrote:what about bumping freighters out of grid, so they can gank and loot without being attacked by other players?
isn't that an exploit of the new crimewatch? The other players can just follow the freighter to the next grid and shoot the suspects there... Why must always CCP provide protection/deem things an exploit?
I'm asking a question about a rules, i'm not stating anything or asking any change.
|
Agent Trask
Aliastra Gallente Federation
43
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 20:26:00 -
[26] - Quote
Sulzer Wartzilla wrote: On the surface of it, this seems reasonable, but what if said target is in an NPC corp?
Exactly.
Most of our targets for Code Compliance are miners in NPC corps to prevent wardecs.
We do not chase them once they have left the belts we are Role-Playing in. We don't use locator agents to hound them. We just want them to pay our fee, or stop mining in the area we are patrolling. This area will often comprise two or three ice belt systems we are currently monitoring.
Join the New Order, buy your permit today, and follow the code.
www.minerbumping.com |
Agent Trask
Aliastra Gallente Federation
43
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 20:30:00 -
[27] - Quote
Red Frog Rufen wrote:
I'm asking a question about a rules, i'm not stating anything or asking any change.
Just a note ... if you drop some objects while being bumped ( frozen corpses are good for this, as most folks don't have them on overview ), the grid will be extended to cover your frieghter well past the normal grid limit. Another option is to anchor small cans as they bump you along.
Look up grid-fu. Join the New Order, buy your permit today, and follow the code.
www.minerbumping.com |
Wescro
Tash-Murkon Amalgamated Security
197
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 21:29:00 -
[28] - Quote
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.
Is there a reason why bumping is being singled out here? I was under the impression that you could persistently hunt (kill their ship) people for bounties (either from the UI or informal merc contracts). Spies usually target a corp for a long time period, and I'm pretty sure it's been acceptable to try to re-infiltrate the same corp. If there is a particularly gullible and rich player, scammers will try again and again until the player learns. It seems to me the only thing you can't persistently do after this ruling is bump a specific player who takes the onerous precaution of jumping a couple of systems.
GM Karidor wrote: 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).
This assumes that bumping is not a risky activity without war decs and that's not true in my experience. I have had my bumping ship suicide ganked, had many bounties placed on me, and received several war decs. There is the social cost of bumping, as it beaks some social relationships while reinforcing others. To paint bumping as a riskless activity that must be infused with "actual" risk by wardeccing seems off the mark. There's plenty of risk doing pretty much anything in EVE that other people strongly dislike.
This thread is awful and it should be locked. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
412
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 21:36:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP FTW. If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
Go2
Capital Industries Research And Development Fidelas Constans
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.30 03:06:00 -
[30] - Quote
You may wish to also clarify that this does not include the new player systems. We don't need people bumping the newbro's.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |