This is not going to end well trust me......

Yes, dont afk mine or just wardec.

Even if what you're asking is a valid question.

I can think of more that a few instances where bumping is extremely useful that doesn't involve afk miners. Simply put, bumping is a valid tactic.

Are these null-sec uses where it's far from a riskless activity or are they hi-sec uses where the risk is damn near zero?

Where did James 315 bump you?

That much aside...yes. It is a valid tactic. Until such a day as ships can collide with one another for damage...totally valid. What if I see a freighter in hi-sec being a buffoon and carrying 10b isk in goodies, why should he have 0 risk for being a moron and me not be able to bump him away from the gates until a gank-squad arrives?

There are many uses beyond just this, and not simply limited to hi-sec.

Think you're just a victim of someone's bumpage and lashing out because you lost something. So...I go back to the original question.

Does it matter? Bumping is a valid tactic in a lot of circumstances.

I've always been a big fan of bumping, I like to think I am quiet good at it. I believe its still need as a game mechanic even if its not practical on stations like it used to be. A prime example for me of why bumping is still needed came a few months ago in the form of a maelstrom. This maelstrom was travelling through empire no "Fs" given full rack of stabs. I must have chased him 6 jumps before i finally managed to get a good line and hit him. without that single bump my gang wold never have managed to catch up and apply more pts and there never would have been a kill.

So yes I think bumping is needed like a lot of mechanics it will get abused to great effect such as mas tempests bumping titans out of shields or bumping orcas for an hr to get a ransom. In a game where scams are legit I see no reason why bumping should be outlawed.

I'm assuming in your example the target was already a war target of some flavor. So what you were doing was not "riskless" because he could have turned around and shot you (or called for help to shoot you or whatever). A random person just being a jerk doesn't have that particular sword of Damocles hanging over their head.

Are these null-sec uses where it's far from a riskless activity or are they hi-sec uses where the risk is damn near zero?

Ok my next example is using a neutral alt to bump a WT off station as he undocks or when he agresses. This is riskless yet I think its fair. Another example is bumping a miner thats dieing to rats, this is also riskless and has the byproduct of being funny as hell.

As to what goons are doing bumping a freighter to hault I believe it serves a duel perpose...

Funny how the worst kind of uneducated idiots are always the ones trying to become the most bad ass "griefers".

Ok my next example is using a neutral alt to bump a WT off station as he undocks or when he agresses. This is riskless yet I think its fair. Another example is bumping a miner thats dieing to rats, this is also riskless and has the byproduct of being funny as hell.

As to what goons are doing bumping a freighter to hault I believe it serves a duel perpose neither of which I am against. true it stops them from warping but this happens all over eve every day whether its a gank or not, and second bumping can be used to slow a targets movement so you can apply more dps or a bigger volley. Are you proposing that we do away with ship collision all together and make ships just fly through eachother because that is a total immersion buzzkill for me.

ps. did goons gank you or somthing to make you make this post?

riskless tactics are not a good thing for EVE (at least IMO). That goes for hi-sec carebears like myself as well. NOTHING we do should be riskless (I LIKED Hulkageddon... mostly because I tanked my Hulk ;)

I think the problem with hisec bumping is that the bumpee is without option to respond or retaliate in kind. (no, bumping people back with a freighter does not count :p )

If you are shot at you can shoot back without hindrance.

If you are stolen from you can shoot back without hindrance.

If you are harassed by a bumper (who is in a cheap insured ship in a undecable npc corp) you can't do nothing of real value to defend yourself. Neither can your friends. All you can do is hope you have more patience than he does, which is not the best game mechanic.

Thus there needs to be a solution to allow active at the keyboard players to do something about getting harrased by a bumper. Something similar to the current theft mechanics.


(I live in lowsec and have no industrial/trader alts, at best I do ammo runs to the local hub)

If you are bumped you can wardec the person, suicide gank them, bump them back... You have options to retaliate against this behaviour, but you carebears choose to complain about it instead of using said options.

Where did James 315 bump you?

That much aside...yes. It is a valid tactic. Until such a day as ships can collide with one another for damage...totally valid. What if I see a freighter in hi-sec being a buffoon and carrying 10b isk in goodies, why should he have 0 risk for being a moron and me not be able to bump him away from the gates until a gank-squad arrives?

There are many uses beyond just this, and not simply limited to hi-sec.

Think you're just a victim of someone's bumpage and lashing out because you lost something. So...I go back to the original question.

Short version: Yes, I think bumping should stay. I also think it should get some basic physics adjustments.

~Zyella

I can agree to that.

Though, I am still waiting for the day I can deal damage by ramming someone.

While I do think bumping should be an active tactic, I also feel that (no pun intended) size should matter. If you are in a frigate, and you bump said freighter, you should go careening off into deep space. The freighter should barely have moved at all.

Short version: Yes, I think bumping should stay. I also think it should get some basic physics adjustments.~Zyella

F = ma

Irony is ironic; are you forgetting that frigate, if traveling at several thousand meters per second transfers a lot more energy/force to the target than its basic mass would suggest? There's also little to no friction in the near-vacuum of space, so each vessel should bounce off in appropriate directions and at appropriate velocities.

Ok my next example is using a neutral alt to bump a WT off station as he undocks or when he agresses. This is riskless yet I think its fair. Another example is bumping a miner thats dieing to rats, this is also riskless and has the byproduct of being funny as hell.

As to what goons are doing bumping a freighter to hault I believe it serves a duel perpose neither of which I am against. true it stops them from warping but this happens all over eve every day whether its a gank or not, and second bumping can be used to slow a targets movement so you can apply more dps or a bigger volley. Are you proposing that we do away with ship collision all together and make ships just fly through eachother because that is a total immersion buzzkill for me.


ps. did goons gank you or somthing to make you make this post?

Take a VW Bug and bump it into a Tractor truck and see what happens. Odds are the truck won't move a millimeter and your VW bug will get kinda smushy in the front. Why such basic physics eludes CCP is beyond me.

Translation: If a a ship with 1/10000th the mass of a freighter hits a freighter, then it's not the freighter that should have it's speed or course changed.

Have you actually tried redirecting a freighter? You can't exactly do it with a frigate.

If you're so worried about being bumped, orbit something! pop out a can and orbit at 500m! Only way to stop you is for your aggressor to take from the can, which allows you to shoot him.

This (somewhat ridiculous) mini-threadnought eventually raised a good question (somewhere around page 8 if you're interested)

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=155027&find=unread

And that is, is there a valid reason to have ship bumping in the game?

My concern/issue/problem is that it is an absolutely riskless activity with no consequences and no correspondingly cheap counter. Sure, I can shoot the guy, but in hi-sec that incurs a lost ship and a security status penalty (not to mention, if I can kill him inside 20 seconds I almost certainly lost a lot more valuable ship than he had). As a result, it strikes me as very nearly the definition of griefing. Leaving aside the issue of ganking, it's just someone causing problems for which there's no rational, reasonable solution.


There was a time when titan bumping was the only form of tackling with subcaps. With heavy interdictors, that's not the case any more.

So does this relic have a place any longer?

Where did James 315 bump you?

That much aside...yes. It is a valid tactic. Until such a day as ships can collide with one another for damage...totally valid. What if I see a freighter in hi-sec being a buffoon and carrying 10b isk in goodies, why should he have 0 risk for being a moron and me not be able to bump him away from the gates until a gank-squad arrives?

There are many uses beyond just this, and not simply limited to hi-sec.

Think you're just a victim of someone's bumpage and lashing out because you lost something. So...I go back to the original question.

Bumping can go away when station games and gate games can go away, mmkay?

You can remove bumping IF:
-Repping people gives aggro so you can't dock/jump as soon as someone shoots your neutral alt yes
-Aggression timer extended to 2 minutes of more no
-You can't jump anymore trough WH while aggressed yes

My concern/issue/problem is that it is an absolutely riskless activity with no consequences and no correspondingly cheap counter.

That describes highsec mission running, highsec incursion running, and highsec mining. Lets add risk to all of those.

High sec mission running does not affect other players.

High sec incursion running does not affect other players.

High sec mining does not affect other players (but unless you are in a Skiff it does have risk).

High sec mission running does not affect other players.

High sec incursion running does not affect other players.

High sec mining does not affect other players (but unless you are in a Skiff it does have risk).

GM Smiley
Bumping is generally allowed. We may make exceptions to this in very extreme circumstances, but we are unable to say in advance at what point we would intervene.

GM Bunyip
we cannot divulge too much information on where we draw the line, as then we risk people abusing our policies by just barely staying within what we define as acceptable.

So you are comparing pulling in isk in pve, and directly affecting another player ship to ship in pvp with no regards as to ship size / scale as your basis for this argument....

I see.

Since that is, in fact, how EVE works, yes.

Every ISK you create through Missioning and Incursioning devalues the ISK that everyone else holds.
Every LP you create through Missioning and Incursioning devalues the LP that everyone else holds.
Every Tag you buy to convert your Mission LP is a tag someone else can't use (putting an upwards pressure on tags).
Every Incursion site you win is a site some other fleet didn't win.
Every Roid you mine is a Roid someone else can't mine.
Every Mineral you create through mining devalues the minerals that everyone else holds.

So your PvE activities affect everyone else in the game.

Bumping a Freighter affects 1 person only.
Bumping and Killing a Freighter affects 1 person negatively and everyone else (who owns minerals) positively because:
There is now the demand for 1 new Freighter, increasing the value of the minerals that go into the freighter.
Only downside is that it once again reduces the value of everyone else's ISK by creating a bunch of ISK (insurance).

And again, you are going to go to an extreme side of a spectrum, and compare something in the far roundabout, to try and compare it and isk, to a game mechanic of a ship affecting a ships physics. Is this one of those odd 'Seven steps to Kevin Bacon' things? o.0

You occasionally get out there in left field when you decide you want to argue about something Pipa, but this one... well, yeah, ill just boggle a bit and move along. ;)

The "problem" as I saw it was about ship bumping in general, be it by high sec grief, pvp, or any other means. I do not recall specifically it being about ship loss.
As to alternative suggestions, I gave mine in the first or second post. It had nothing to do with removing it altogether, station games, or adding damage / aggression flags. I would have to go back and read the posts again, but I don't recall more than a couple of people arguing for it to be removed.

And it is not just freighters its used against, hence their reference to no cheap counters. Making multiple trips is no counter to bumping in regards to a gank, unless you are just trying to talk about monetary value of a haul, and in high sec only.

If the Bumping of the Freighter doesn't result in a gank, it most likely falls under the griefing rules. So it's not a "problem" for anyone unless they lose their ship (in which case it's a valid tactic).

If you're talking about realism, Well...
Space is a Viscous Liquid
Ships have Top Speeds instead of Top Accelerations
Turrets deliver their damage instantaneously
Faster than Light Sonar that can't tell how far away things are (d-scan)
Grid-Fu
etc.

Your suggestion was what, change the bump mechanics from momentum=mass*velocity to momentum=volume*velocity? Seriously?
Because Mass is already taken into account (that's why Bump Machs and Bump SFIs are used instead of Bump Frigates).


Oh, and since there are laughably few freighter ganks that don't have an expected profit, taking 2 trips is absolutely a counter to bumping that leads to being ganked (GM action is the counter to bumping freighters that aren't going to be ganked).


As for the other uses of bumping, it's how you stop gate crashing, how you stop station games, Titans from getting back into their POS shields, etc. Why should those people be able to do their thing without any fear?

a) Everyone on these forums knows just how quickly GM's take action against just about anything in EVE.
b) I've managed to bump Orcas carriers, freighters, and a dread so far piloting nothing but cruisers and frigates, and did a great job at it, so not sure exactly how well any installed bump mechanics may be at the moment, but if they are in play they need adjustment. I can't comment on bumping a Titan as I've never been close enough to one yet (I rarely get that deep into SOV space).
c) Bumping people out of shields... ugh, POS's in general seem to need some work, but I do not know nearly enough about those to even try for an idea on them. I do feel that larger ships should be able to bump people out of shields (taking care of your 'being able to do their thing without fear odd comment')
d) I was not, and still am not going as far as to say 'make it real'. I am all for, however, something a lot closer than it is currently.

I doubt anything about bumping will change anytime soon, entirely too many more important issues in game to work on. I would love to see it eventually however.

Its late around here, I'm off. I wish you many kills,

07
~Zyella

It would just be odd if you could pass through every ship you came across. There are a lot of reasons to bump people, least of all is the griefing.


What really should be done is CCP getting collision damage into the game.


ORCA TO RAMMING SPEED!

I call Jita undock Camera.

Exactly how am I meant to kill that annoying bellend that I am at war with who likes to sit out on a station undock in a battleship refusing to aggress anything, regardless of what it is or whether or not support is present unless I can bump that douche off station with a neutral in a 10mn MWD fit cruiser?

hm....
how is Frighter pilot meant to fight those pesky aplha-tornadoe suiciders who uses neutral scaner + logoff traps?
How is tankless miner meant to survive high-sec gankers?

I see wide range of stupid and unlogical things needed to answer those stupid questions.

How about a module that deals damage to a ship that rams you proportionate to it's inertia? Or, perhaps a module so when rammed, that person's propulsion systems are disabled for a period of time (passive stasis webifier?).

If it you made it so there were small, medium, and large modules that took up a large amount of powergrid/cpu, you wouldn't see the module used in PvP (so that tactic would still be useful), yet it would still be useful as an anti-griefing module.

Any reason(s) that can't/shouldn't be done?

How about a module that deals damage to a ship that rams you proportionate to it's inertia? Or, perhaps a module so when rammed, that person's propulsion systems are disabled for a period of time (passive stasis webifier?).

I demand a general speed limit in hisec.

How about a module that deals damage to a ship that rams you proportionate to it's inertia? Or, perhaps a module so when rammed, that person's propulsion systems are disabled for a period of time (passive stasis webifier?).

If it you made it so there were small, medium, and large modules that took up a large amount of powergrid/cpu, you wouldn't see the module used in PvP (so that tactic would still be useful), yet it would still be useful as an anti-griefing module.

Any reason(s) that can't/shouldn't be done?

Ok so we have a significant improvement in the amount of force applied but it still doesn't come close to the force needed to budge the freighter.

TLDR: Bumping mechanic is broken but there isn't a fix for it.

just introduce ramming instead, .25 of each damage type per 1ms of speed in addition to current bumping mechanics.
you can still bump but running an MWDing inty into the side of a freighter has the appropriate bug on windscreen affect on the inty.

I say that the bug vs. windshield theory should not apply. Why? Shields, of course!

I'll clarify:
The ships have shields that currently act like a rubber ball for the purposes of collisions with other objects. This means that any such collisions are elastic (based on the definition per RL Physics).

I propose that the collisions should instead be inelastic in a way such that the shield of each ship takes damage. Flavor-wise, it could make sense that when the shields repel each other, they interfere and partially overload the respective shield matrices. Since an inelastic collision results in a loss of energy, the rebound velocities would be lower than currently in place. How much damage each shield takes should be a function of the momentum exchange. This way, the damage is equal, but the effect on each ship differs. Obv. the smaller ship would suffer more. E.g., a frig's shield taking 150 dmg is more critical than a BS's shield taking 150 dmg.

Since dmg is involved I would expect that KR on the offender would be a likely implementation, and the reciprocity of the damage seems fair. Bumping with this in place can still be used tactically, but the gained vulnerability no longer makes the choice as easy.

Thoughts?

Wheee... CONCORD-Free Suicide Ganking.

If you're going to say "Bumping Triggers CONCORD," then:
Wheee... CONCORD doing the Suicide Ganking for us! (Simply park a ship in front of the Jita Undock and watch it get bumped by the ebil gankers undocking)

Where did James 315 bump you?

That much aside...yes. It is a valid tactic. Until such a day as ships can collide with one another for damage...totally valid. What if I see a freighter in hi-sec being a buffoon and carrying 10b isk in goodies, why should he have 0 risk for being a moron and me not be able to bump him away from the gates until a gank-squad arrives?

There are many uses beyond just this, and not simply limited to hi-sec.

Think you're just a victim of someone's bumpage and lashing out because you lost something. So...I go back to the original question.

The idea is for the bumper, not the bumpee to become targetable. I'm not sure how that could even really be done logistically with the current implementation of aggression and docking mechanics.. If possible though, it would not mean Concord-Free ganking. The idea is to introduce a method of applying a consequence to bumping others. Under this idea, if you bump, they are allowed shoot you, it doesn't mean that they should or will shoot back.

I do agree that gates, and major market undocks are the largest barrier to modifying or replacing the bump mechanic.

Mostly, I am going for combo of the ram damage idea and slight griefer punishment.

Ok, if the Bumper gets concorded (or becomes flagged) just park a ship in front of the Jita undock (or in the path to the gate from an AP landing spot) and your victims will bump you, getting them CONCORDed or Flagged as a legal target.

Ahem

Wheeeeeee, CONCORD-free (or CONCORD-assisted) freighter (and everything else) ganks.

....Stuff....

Someone needs to re-open their kinematics textbook I seeGǪ What you have is kinematics problem, and while you could figure this out with forces (since we are working with elastic collisions), you canGÇÖt the way youGÇÖre trying to do it (using velocity instead of acceleration). The easiest way to do this is to use conservation of momentum. To simplify the equation, weGÇÖll assume that the frigate transfers all of its energy to the freighter (thus frigate final velocity = 0). Therefore:

M1V1 + M2V2 = M1V3 + M2V4

Where M1 = Freighter Mass
M2 = Frigate Mass
V1 = Initial Freighter Velocity
V2 = Initial Frigate Velocity
V3 = Final Freighter Velocity
V4 = Final Frigate Velocity

Velocity is of course a vector, so to simplify our calculation, weGÇÖll assume a perpendicular collision (i.e. the freighter is moving perpendicular to the frigate). Therefore V1 = 0 and V4 = 0 (remember weGÇÖre dealing with vectors, and I assumed complete energy transfer).

Using numbers for an ibis (with a MWD) and a charon, I used 960 e6 for M1, 1.663 e6 for M1 (the MWD raises mass by 500000) and 2448 m/s for V2.

Solving for V3, I get 4.24 m/s (this would be the Freighter's velocity in the initial frigateGÇÖs direction). For those who want the full challenge (i.e. the Frigate doesnGÇÖt completely transfer all itGÇÖs energy, you will need to solve for V3 in relation to V4 in the conservation of Momentum equation and plug it into the Conservation of Energy equation and solve the polynomial equation GÇô have fun). However in that case, the angle changed would only be smaller.

In other words the freighter will be knocked off course by 3.733 degrees. Which considering the number of times IGÇÖve warped sideways, probably really isnGÇÖt enough to prevent a warp.


i.e. Bumping in EvE has nothing to do with real life physics....

This (somewhat ridiculous) mini-threadnought eventually raised a good question (somewhere around page 8 if you're interested)

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=155027&find=unread

And that is, is there a valid reason to have ship bumping in the game?

My concern/issue/problem is that it is an absolutely riskless activity with no consequences and no correspondingly cheap counter. Sure, I can shoot the guy, but in hi-sec that incurs a lost ship and a security status penalty (not to mention, if I can kill him inside 20 seconds I almost certainly lost a lot more valuable ship than he had). As a result, it strikes me as very nearly the definition of griefing. Leaving aside the issue of ganking, it's just someone causing problems for which there's no rational, reasonable solution.


There was a time when titan bumping was the only form of tackling with subcaps. With heavy interdictors, that's not the case any more.

So does this relic have a place any longer?

Someone needs to re-open their kinematics textbook I seeGǪ What you have is kinematics problem, and while you could figure this out with forces (since we are working with elastic collisions), you canGÇÖt the way youGÇÖre trying to do it (using velocity instead of acceleration). The easiest way to do this is to use conservation of momentum. To simplify the equation, weGÇÖll assume that the frigate transfers all of its energy to the freighter (thus frigate final velocity = 0). Therefore:

M1V1 + M2V2 = M1V3 + M2V4

Where M1 = Freighter Mass
M2 = Frigate Mass
V1 = Initial Freighter Velocity
V2 = Initial Frigate Velocity
V3 = Final Freighter Velocity
V4 = Final Frigate Velocity

Velocity is of course a vector, so to simplify our calculation, weGÇÖll assume a perpendicular collision (i.e. the freighter is moving perpendicular to the frigate). Therefore V1 = 0 and V4 = 0 (remember weGÇÖre dealing with vectors, and I assumed complete energy transfer).

Using numbers for an ibis (with a MWD) and a charon, I used 960 e6 for M1, 1.663 e6 for M1 (the MWD raises mass by 500000) and 2448 m/s for V2.

Solving for V3, I get 4.24 m/s (this would be the Freighter's velocity in the initial frigateGÇÖs direction). For those who want the full challenge (i.e. the Frigate doesnGÇÖt completely transfer all itGÇÖs energy, you will need to solve for V3 in relation to V4 in the conservation of Momentum equation and plug it into the Conservation of Energy equation and solve the polynomial equation GÇô have fun). However in that case, the angle changed would only be smaller.

In other words the freighter will be knocked off course by 3.733 degrees. Which considering the number of times IGÇÖve warped sideways, probably really isnGÇÖt enough to prevent a warp.


i.e. Bumping in EvE has nothing to do with real life physics....

No offense, but I think you need to reopen your textbook as well :) The kinetic energy is 1/2*mass*velocity squared. In other words your equation should be:

m1v1^2 + m2v2^2 = m1v3^2 + m2v4^2

which, if solved for v3, gives:

v3 = square root ( m2/m1 * v2^2)

v3 = square root ( 1.663/960 * 2448^2) = 101.9 m/s

F = ma

Irony is ironic; are you forgetting that frigate, if traveling at several thousand meters per second transfers a lot more energy/force to the target than its basic mass would suggest? There's also little to no friction in the near-vacuum of space, so each vessel should bounce off in appropriate directions and at appropriate velocities.

If you are harassed by a bumper (who is in a cheap insured ship in a undecable npc corp) you can't do nothing of real value to defend yourself. Neither can your friends. All you can do is hope you have more patience than he does, which is not the best game mechanic.

And that is, is there a valid reason to have ship bumping in the game?

I would LOVE to see a collision mechanic in place. If a heavy armored cruiser bumps a mining rig at top speed then mass amounts of damage to miner. If a nano frig bumps a freighter the frig just pops. Im not gonna pretend to have thought through this at all but it would be cool. Maybe a ramming speed mod...reinforced prow for tearing through enemy hulls. And 'cause it causes damage you can shoot back. It could still effect speed and trajectory to continue to be used as it is now

I'd love to see realistic collision physics. People would become terrified of freighters.