| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp
3032
   |
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:03:00 -
[31] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:As long as you are willing to fly your ship you can keep on mining.
I suspect that might be a deal-breaker for some people/machines.
I mean, if you're going to be at your keyboard, you may as well mine in lowsec and shoot anyone who tries to bump you. 
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ MinerBumping.com -½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½The daily saga of the New Order's quest to conquer all highsec by bumping miners out of range. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
1063
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:19:00 -
[32] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:A space anchor ?
Actually that's quite interesting.
I could see it being related to the way that a Cyno ship can't be moved; a module that adds ship mass perhaps ?
Everything needs a counter ...
Lets hear some fleshed out ideas!
Edit: Apologies to Akirei Scytale who already mentioned the mass thing ...
Here's the best damn idea anyone's come up with so far.
You can drop a space anchor that has the same equivalent mass multiplier that a siege module does, but while it's activated you cannot move, warp, activate any modules, or lock anything. The module has a 10 minute duration and cannot be deactivated prior to that. Any ships that log off while anchored will not disappear until one minute after the anchor module deactivates, or 15 minutes after last received aggression prior to logging off, whichever comes last.
http://themittani.com/features/local-problem
A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Core Federation
Black Core Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:35:00 -
[33] - Quote
Try ice mining in a Hulk orbiting the rock with a MWD on. Stagger your ice harvester cycles.
Hulk has 2x the mass of a Mackinaw, or 10x the mass with the MWD going. I'm not an expert in bumping, but it ought to make a big difference in how far you get bumped off.
Being in orbit around the rock should reduce the distance your ship gets bumped, and your ship will automatically try to regain that position.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
1063
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:46:00 -
[34] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Try ice mining in a Hulk orbiting the rock with a MWD on. Stagger your ice harvester cycles.
Hulk has 2x the mass of a Mackinaw, or 10x the mass with the MWD going. I'm not an expert in bumping, but it ought to make a big difference in how far you get bumped off.
Being in orbit around the rock should reduce the distance your ship gets bumped, and your ship will automatically try to regain that position.
Before someone complains about this, here's a hint:
Afterburners add the same amount of mass an equivalent sized MWD does, and they're a lot easier to fit.
http://themittani.com/features/local-problem
A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Shederov Blood
Wrecketeers
107
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:46:00 -
[35] - Quote
Oh yes, a siege module for barges that makes you unbumpable!
The only drawback is, you have to give up a high-slot for it, which no miner would ever do.  |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Core Federation
Black Core Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 03:53:00 -
[36] - Quote
Ah, looks like I mixed up sig radius with mass increase. Yeah, afterburners do add the same mass as MWDs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
404
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:03:00 -
[37] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:A space anchor ?
Actually that's quite interesting.
I could see it being related to the way that a Cyno ship can't be moved; a module that adds ship mass perhaps ?
Everything needs a counter ...
Lets hear some fleshed out ideas!
Edit: Apologies to Akirei Scytale who already mentioned the mass thing ...
What good will a module that adds mass to a ship in a game whose mechanics allow less then frigate noobships to bump Battle ships without neigh a dent of damage?
Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums like a little ***** until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. |
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
481
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
Souisa wrote:Hello,
An alt of mine was just bumped outside HEK in an orca. If i hadnt been paying attention i would have been outside dock range soon enough and most likely popped by wartargets. This orca even had Reinforced Bulkheads.
Anyway. It seems that alot of miners are having an issue with bumping, but i think its a viable tactic. If i hadnt payed attention then with my orca i probably would have lost it. There were no WT's around at the time, but they would have shown up, webbed and scrammed me the second they see im outside dock range. Anyway, kudos to them for that, these kinds of tactics only make EVE a more interesting place. Anyway. There should be a way to defend against this IMO, some sort of anchor.
You undocked in an Orca while at war?
Trust me son, your problems are much more severe than worrying about bumping.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
626
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:13:00 -
[39] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:
If its a true anchor, like POSes or GSCs have, then it would work the same way. You would activate it, and after a delay your ship would be fixed at one spot. There would have to be distance limits like there are for GSCs: A ship cannot anchor within some distance of another object. (This prevents people from blocking a station undock with anchored ships). Maybe 5 km?
In addition, an anchored ship should remain anchored even if you eject from it. This would stop issues with ships getting bumped out of POS fields and all the petitions that result. It would also give supercap pilots confidence that if they left their ship in their POS, it will still be there when they return. (And now Im nerfing myself. I once stole a Proteus that got accidentally bumped out of a POS field by the enemy when they warped in a Nyx.)
A bump reduction module would be sort of like a personal web. It just greatly slows you down, and increases the "drag" factor of your ship. The issue here is not to make it an insta-warp module. Maybe it not only slows you, but prevents you from warping.
That is quite an interesting suggestion indeed. What is the flipside I wonder ? bumping is a valid tactic, and so therefore 'self anchoring' would then become a valid defence too. But then, where is the emergent game-play ? Meaning, if two play styles can negate each-other; why would anyone do it ? How do you counter that ? Off the top of my head, Self anchoring would have a cascading benefit according to the skill level of the person who anchors, and perhaps the level of navigation skill + mass involved would combat that by the person bumping ?
make is a high slot mod and it reduces mining efficiancy... sure you can put one on and anchor yourself but you will have to pay a price for it... and for those who wish not to fit the mod then can have potential to make a higher isk/hour...
Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point?
-áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Opertone
Aurora Empire
Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels
166
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:14:00 -
[40] - Quote
omg, attention seekers...
it is not likely that bump whining comes from genuine people. Boring. |
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
482
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:15:00 -
[41] - Quote
Shederov Blood wrote:Oh yes, a siege module for barges that makes you unbumpable! The only drawback is, you have to give up a high-slot for it, which no miner would ever do.
Better yet, make it a low slot mod and watch their brains implode trying to work out a way to fit it AND a tank without removing at least one MLU.
They'll settle for the MLU and come to the forums complaining about bumping.
Oh.... 
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
1589
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:16:00 -
[42] - Quote
I like how haters will be for the module if it is such a massive nerf on whatever it is you are trying to do, that using it is pointless. Typical.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Souisa
WESCORP 2.0
16
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:19:00 -
[43] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:Souisa wrote:Hello,
An alt of mine was just bumped outside HEK in an orca. If i hadnt been paying attention i would have been outside dock range soon enough and most likely popped by wartargets. This orca even had Reinforced Bulkheads.
Anyway. It seems that alot of miners are having an issue with bumping, but i think its a viable tactic. If i hadnt payed attention then with my orca i probably would have lost it. There were no WT's around at the time, but they would have shown up, webbed and scrammed me the second they see im outside dock range. Anyway, kudos to them for that, these kinds of tactics only make EVE a more interesting place. Anyway. There should be a way to defend against this IMO, some sort of anchor. You undocked in an Orca while at war? Trust me son, your problems are much more severe than worrying about bumping.
Calculated risk
--
I suggest that the module will fit into a low-slot because thats where armor and other hull related stuff seems to go. It will also be a minor nerf to miners as they have to sacrifice a mining optimization laser or w/e. A bonus for miners at least is they can keep their shield tank more or less intact, because shield tanks usually revolve around med slots. |
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
482
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:38:00 -
[44] - Quote
Souisa wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:
You undocked in an Orca while at war?
Trust me son, your problems are much more severe than worrying about bumping.
Calculated risk
I'd be getting new batteries for said calculator.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
482
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:40:00 -
[45] - Quote
Souisa wrote: A bonus for miners at least is they can keep their shield tank more or less intact, because shield tanks usually revolve around med slots.
Not according to gankers.
We're supposed to tank shield and armor apparently. Gee. An extra mod or two in the mids and lows and we can tank hull as well.
Stupid miners.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
Souisa
WESCORP 2.0
16
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:47:00 -
[46] - Quote
Nevermind goddamn trolls :) |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
1391
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:48:00 -
[47] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:
That is quite an interesting suggestion indeed.
What is the flipside I wonder ? bumping is a valid tactic, and so therefore 'self anchoring' would then become a valid defence too.
But then, where is the emergent game-play ?
Meaning, if two play styles can negate each-other; why would anyone do it ?
How do you counter that ?
Off the top of my head, Self anchoring would have a cascading benefit according to the skill level of the person who anchors, and perhaps the level of navigation skill + mass involved would combat that by the person bumping ?
Have to be careful with super mass adding module ideas, specially if it still keeps you mobile. As that would be just another thing added to wormhole corps to easily collapse holes beyond plates and MWD as it is.
It has to lock you down. Lets say, average strip cycle time per rep. Be a low slot to hurt yield. Uses Fuel blocks. and shrinks ore bay.
List of possible perks beyond being immobile for a set amount of time?
Increased miner cycle speed (more yield for time yet they are not getting more out of their crystals). Miner range. Miner drone speed. A damage control like resistance boost across the board. Less cap needed for boosters.
How to counter? The anchor requires a asteroid (they don't move when bumped yes?) Someone undermines the asteroid that was anchoring them and its turns off the module and the feedback makes it inoperable for 10 minutes. So they are stuck without the perks, and a smaller ore bay. They have to take the time to refit or wait it out.
Also bumpers mining to attack miners, fuuuuny. |
Souisa
WESCORP 2.0
16
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 04:50:00 -
[48] - Quote
More trolls. |
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
482
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 05:33:00 -
[49] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:In addition, an anchored ship should remain anchored even if you eject from it. This would stop issues with ships getting bumped out of POS fields and all the petitions that result. It would also give supercap pilots confidence that if they left their ship in their POS, it will still be there when they return. (And now Im nerfing myself. I once stole a Proteus that got accidentally bumped out of a POS field by the enemy when they warped in a Nyx.)
So where does starbursting fit in? And by that, how do we go about kicking people out of POS when they have the password to get in?
They could just anchor and stay?
Make it not possible inside a POS if not ally?
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp
3038
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 15:10:00 -
[50] - Quote
Opertone wrote:omg, attention seekers...
it is not likely that bump whining comes from genuine people. Boring.
Botters and bot-aspirants, perhaps, but they are still people. 
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ MinerBumping.com -½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½The daily saga of the New Order's quest to conquer all highsec by bumping miners out of range. |
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
93
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 15:32:00 -
[51] - Quote
I agree with the high slot idea. Much like a cyno, it takes a high slot, but anchors you down for a set amount of time. You cannot move, you cannot do anything, other than sit there and mine. That means if you are targeted for a gank, well you're S.O.L. Maybe it should require fuel as well?... |
Xiode
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 15:43:00 -
[52] - Quote
FC always tells me to orbit the anchor, orbit the anchor!! But pilots of fleet not in overview. I have to find anchor in space, takes long time. After that EVE becomes easy I only have to push F1. |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
299
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:25:00 -
[53] - Quote
Make the anchor system a High/Mid/low module set that only works when all three are fitted. If you dont want to be bumped, you need to sacrifice both yield and tank.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings? |
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
95
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:26:00 -
[54] - Quote
Bumping because this is (except for the above troll suggestion) a good idea. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1090
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:32:00 -
[55] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Try ice mining in a Hulk orbiting the rock with a MWD on. Stagger your ice harvester cycles.
Hulk has 2x the mass of a Mackinaw, or 10x the mass with the MWD going. I'm not an expert in bumping, but it ought to make a big difference in how far you get bumped off.
Being in orbit around the rock should reduce the distance your ship gets bumped, and your ship will automatically try to regain that position.
A hulk has a mass of 40 million. a MWD adds 0.5 million. Hardly x10 mass. If you could somehow squeeze on a 10 MN MWD you would gain 5 million in mass. Still far below x10.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1090
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:35:00 -
[56] - Quote
Tali Ambraelle wrote:I agree with the high slot idea. Much like a cyno, it takes a high slot, but anchors you down for a set amount of time. You cannot move, you cannot do anything, other than sit there and mine. That means if you are targeted for a gank, well you're S.O.L. Maybe it should require fuel as well?...
If its a high slot then its use would make the Skiff useless. It has just one high slot.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1090
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:39:00 -
[57] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:In addition, an anchored ship should remain anchored even if you eject from it. This would stop issues with ships getting bumped out of POS fields and all the petitions that result. It would also give supercap pilots confidence that if they left their ship in their POS, it will still be there when they return. (And now Im nerfing myself. I once stole a Proteus that got accidentally bumped out of a POS field by the enemy when they warped in a Nyx.)
So where does starbursting fit in? And by that, how do we go about kicking people out of POS when they have the password to get in? They could just anchor and stay? Make it not possible inside a POS if not ally?
Make it so the ship anchor is not absolute. That is the POS force field can eject an anchored ship. Then all you need do is change the password.
Having the anchor less than absolute also means you can still bump people, just only a small distance per bump.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Marvin Narville
Evil .inc
WHY so Seri0Us
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:52:00 -
[58] - Quote
Tali Ambraelle wrote:Bumping because this is (except for the above troll suggestion) a good idea.
Oh, I see you've joined in on the bumper griefing as well! Seems to me we have a pot calling the kettle black situation, which i suppose would make you a racist as well sir!
I propose we implement some sort of "forum anchor" to combat this nefarious forum bumping campaign being perpetrated by Tali and her minions. Perhaps it could add mass(ive) walls of text to your forum signature radius, so large that it limits each page to a single post! We could call it a 1600mm reinforced rolled texten plate, and balance it by having it also prevent you from using the smiley face icons for 10, or perhaps even 20 minutes, while also reducing your tin foil hat resistances by 25%.
Lets take a stand against Tali and these forum bumpers! |
Tali Ambraelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:56:00 -
[59] - Quote
Marvin Narville wrote:Tali Ambraelle wrote:Bumping because this is (except for the above troll suggestion) a good idea. Oh, I see you've joined in on the bumper griefing as well! Seems to me we have a pot calling the kettle black situation, which i suppose would make you a racist as well sir! I propose we implement some sort of "forum anchor" to combat this nefarious forum bumping campaign being perpetrated by Tali and her minions. Perhaps it could add mass(ive) walls of text to your forum signature radius, so large that it limits each page to a single post! We could call it a 1600mm reinforced rolled texten plate, and balance it by having it also prevent you from using the smiley face icons for 10, or perhaps even 20 minutes, while also reducing your tin foil hat resistances by 25%. Lets take a stand against Tali and these forum bumpers!
wut |
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
123
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 17:39:00 -
[60] - Quote
Souisa wrote:Hello,
There should be a way to defend against this IMO, some sort of anchor.
Drop a can, keep at range. Voila... |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |