Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
87102-6
Mining Cartel high
20
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:07:00 -
[91] - Quote
Bing Bangboom wrote:87102-6 wrote:For folks not quite familiar with the situation that's been going on and why I deem it harassment . And then your whole argument with nothing that justifies changing anything. You are fairly accurate in your description of what Agents of the New Order do but your whole reason for why bumping should be banned ...
I said no such thing. I have stated repeatedly in this thread, and in the Assembly Hall thread: I DO NOT WANT GAME MECHANICS CHANGED. I strongly believe this is a social problem and needs to be dealt with by CCP at that level, i.e. very stern talks between senior GMs and the players explaining that what's transpiring is too extreme and that it should cease, or possibly an EULA update.
I do not agree with the idea of modules to anchor ships, "nerfing" bumping, giving miners "extra special benefits" within game mechanics / on a technical level, or anything similar to that. Others here have proposed those (including a corpmate) -- I do not share those sentiments. Maybe that makes me the odd man out, but so be it. |
Rodtrik
Aphex Industries
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:09:00 -
[92] - Quote
Winchester Steele wrote:Rodtrik wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: General Anger. Why do you care if miners are "babied?" Every time CCP caves in to these soft wheezing demands for safety, entitlement and "fair" gameplay a little piece of this game's dark and dangerous soul dies. I suspect that makes Mallak, and anyone who truly loves this game, sad for the loss.
But it does not affect your dark and dangerous corner of the game...so? |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
266
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:09:00 -
[93] - Quote
Ross Sylibus wrote: This debate is not at all about the actual function of the bumping mechanic - it is about what kind of game EVE is. If CCP has such a vision they should simply consult it and act accordingly related to this particular issue - if they don't, then broader discussion needs to first occur to determine the answer to that larger question before we continue down this path of tweaking minor details that only serve to embody the actualization of that vision.
This is exactly it perhaps CCP should put a devblog out about this. npc alts aren't people |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
266
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:12:00 -
[94] - Quote
Rodtrik wrote:Winchester Steele wrote:Rodtrik wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: General Anger. Why do you care if miners are "babied?" Every time CCP caves in to these soft wheezing demands for safety, entitlement and "fair" gameplay a little piece of this game's dark and dangerous soul dies. I suspect that makes Mallak, and anyone who truly loves this game, sad for the loss. But it does not affect your dark and dangerous corner of the game...so?
Everything you do affects everyone else whether you know it or not that's part of the beauty of the game. That's also why a lot of people get upset when ways to affect highsec players get removed. It takes a subset of players and makes it so they can affect you more than you can affect them it reduces the "fairness" of the game. While ~ebushido~ has been naturally selected against no one likes being against an unfair situation. Which is where risk and reward come in but that's not this thread so if you want that go make your own thread. npc alts aren't people |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1171
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:13:00 -
[95] - Quote
Capt Lynch wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Capt Lynch wrote:While I think James claim that it is to get rid of bot miners is admirable, he does not do that...his blog itself in many articles confirms itd all about the grief...and always was. It's about emergent game play. Really? Calling me a lier? (I'll hold my hand up to that...given its EVE and lying is a way of life in many circles there) The comments calling for me to suffer indefinate harassment? The continued calls for me to play his way if I ever wanna be able to play the game properly or to just quit the game?
I did not call you a lier, I don't even know what that is. I called you a compulsive liar which you have proven to be over the course of the few weeks that you have been known to us to which I might add, was instigated by you. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
M0N0
The Right Hand of Darwin
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:14:00 -
[96] - Quote
Plenty of pilots asking for a effective counter to bumping...
Can I ask on behalf of everyone else for an effective counter to afk mining ect? A few suggestion: Being afk for 3 minutes or more gives you an aggression timer. Introducing a module that delays concord. Making afk against the rules. Allowing ore bays to be stolen from.
Any of the above are very much comparable to the popular requests from miners and would make the game more interesting instead of dull. Please, please stop asking for balancing or fairness - you already have it! Every ship in eve is able to bump but unlike mining it requires being at the keyboard AKA playing the game. In my opinion if anything barges need to be nerfed, 80,000 EHP is insane for a ship that can also go 1km/s with merely an AB(yes i am talking about the skiff).
All that being said I think the best thing for CCP to do is concentrate on making mining more intresting/engaging rather than afk/safe. |
Orions Lord
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:14:00 -
[97] - Quote
I didn't read anything does it matter? Slowly the sandbox is going away no matter what.
People like James 315 are going to be nerfed to death in the end.
Not now but in 2 years or so it will. The high sec sandbox is already almost gone James gave is a new boost. A new game play and it's sure fun. Let's see how long it will last.
First it was about the new players I agree we need to help them but older miners, and missioners or whatever they should know better.
We will find new ways and when we can't we just leave like bitter vets. Who cares anyway in the end it's a freaking game.
|
Winchester Steele
A Perfectly Normal Corp.
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:15:00 -
[98] - Quote
Ahvram wrote:La Nariz wrote:In addition to my previous post if you remove ways of affecting highsec players without adding others you make the game itself less interesting. Look at the forum threads and the two opposing websites, something as simple as bumping has spawned as examples of this. Without this simple mechanic, bumping, none of that would have happened and highsec would be that much more dull. Ask yourself this CCP, "do I really want to remove a key tool in creating content for my game just to appease a minority of loud whiners?" I read "Dont take away our easy completely no risk way of exploiting High sec players as we lack the ability to do so in a legitimate way" Thats the real issue here and no other. So many long winded aurguments when this is the only real reason.
How is there no risk? Do you even know what you're spouting off about? There are lots of ways that miners could inject risk into the equation for bumpers. However, that would require :effort:. Come gank me. Come wardec me. Come camp me. But you won't because your too busy being afk.
Instead, people like you would rather whine to CCP and moan about harassment and entitlement. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1172
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:16:00 -
[99] - Quote
Rodtrik wrote:Winchester Steele wrote:Rodtrik wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: General Anger. Why do you care if miners are "babied?" Every time CCP caves in to these soft wheezing demands for safety, entitlement and "fair" gameplay a little piece of this game's dark and dangerous soul dies. I suspect that makes Mallak, and anyone who truly loves this game, sad for the loss. But it does not affect your dark and dangerous corner of the game...so?
I choose to do what I do in highsec. The nullsec part is of little interest beyond sec status grinding. So in effect, it does in fact affect my dark corner of the game. Highsec is not supposed to be safe. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
87102-6
Mining Cartel high
20
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:17:00 -
[100] - Quote
This is an interesting take on the situation -- and I say that politely and with total respect. Very well-written, and very thought-provoking. I'll ponder what you've said, but wanted to say thank you for what you've written. |
|
Bing Bangboom
Ded End Damage Inc. United Sytems Against Terrorist Opperations
17
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:18:00 -
[101] - Quote
87102-6 wrote:Bing Bangboom wrote:87102-6 wrote:For folks not quite familiar with the situation that's been going on and why I deem it harassment . And then your whole argument with nothing that justifies changing anything. You are fairly accurate in your description of what Agents of the New Order do but your whole reason for why bumping should be banned ... I said no such thing. I have stated repeatedly in this thread, and in the Assembly Hall thread: I DO NOT WANT GAME MECHANICS CHANGED. I strongly believe this is a social problem and needs to be dealt with by CCP at that level, i.e. very stern talks between senior GMs and the players explaining that what's transpiring is too extreme and that it should cease, or possibly an EULA update. I do not agree with the idea of modules to anchor ships, "nerfing" bumping, giving miners "extra special benefits" within game mechanics / on a technical level, or anything similar to that. Others here have proposed those (including a corpmate) -- I do not share those sentiments. Maybe that makes me the odd man out, but so be it.
I think that I understand what you said you want. I know you want a social change. I don't mean this to be beligerent (or undesirable). What you are describing in your second paragraph is "stop bumping or be banned". Correct me if I am wrong in understanding what you have said. I think you are saying you want CCP to step in and make the bumpers stop bumping. In some ways what you want is even worse than changing the mechanics. We could at least attempt to adapt to a mechanics change. You are demanding that we stop or be exterminated. What if we don't stop? Are you in favor of all the Agents being thrown out of Eve?
I bet you'd miss us. We're kind of fun guys when you get to know us.
www.minerbumping.com
Bing Bangboom Agent of the New Order of Highsec Beligerent Undesirable |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
269
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:21:00 -
[102] - Quote
M0N0 wrote:Plenty of pilots asking for a effective counter to bumping...
Can I ask on behalf of everyone else for an effective counter to afk mining ect? A few suggestion: Being afk for 3 minutes or more gives you an aggression timer. Introducing a module that delays concord. Making afk against the rules. Allowing ore bays to be stolen from.
Any of the above are very much comparable to the popular requests from miners and would make the game more interesting instead of dull. Please, please stop asking for balancing or fairness - you already have it! Every ship in eve is able to bump but unlike mining it requires being at the keyboard AKA playing the game. In my opinion if anything barges need to be nerfed, 80,000 EHP is insane for a ship that can also go 1km/s with merely an AB(yes i am talking about the skiff).
All that being said I think the best thing for CCP to do is concentrate on making mining more intresting/engaging rather than afk/safe.
I'm pretty sure AFK mining is already against the rules its just a sticky situation because mining game play is terrible:
3. You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.
That's from the EULA http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/eula.asp
Being AFK means you are not at the keyboard so you should be unable to do an in-space module required activity to acquire items (ice/ore). It gives you an advantage because you are acquiring items without devoting the time required to get said items hence faster than ordinary game play. npc alts aren't people |
Kan Ajyn
Moonraker Mutual Industries Co operative Fortuna Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:21:00 -
[103] - Quote
I'm retired and disabled. I spend all my free time on the web and in the game of EVE. I have some bad health days when I have to AFK for 5 to 10 minutes at a time due to my health. This is when I usually ice mine in Abudban because it used to be a safe haven where I could play the game at the speed I was capable of. That has been taken away from me by the bumping and harrassment. I can now only play EVE on my good days leaving me nothing to do with myself on my bad days. New Order is making excuses for their bullying tactics and getting CCP to sanction their method of play. Every game that I've played in the past has had some safe haven players could run to when they wanted to chill out and just relax. Abudban was one of the safe havens a player could relax and still play the game
Now in my opinion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with bumping, its part of the game of EVE, bullying and extortion is part of the game of life, put the 2 together for a more realistic game. Sure, but a safe haven should be part of that also. There's not really anything wrong with selling a license for mining either but then it should it be a territory that's fought over then? Everybody should have to fight for a piece of the action but right now, what I'm hearing is wardec's are of no use. Let's say there's 100 diferent 'New Orders' all wanting 10 million isk from each miner for mining alowances in Abudban. Now for safe haven in abudban, a miner has to pay 100,000,000, and who's going to keep the rates from going any higher.
If bumping and mining licenses are going to be allowed Then why not put all mining areas in 0.3 and lower and make the people wanting to sell licenses, fight for the right to do so. |
Crazey Monkey
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:21:00 -
[104] - Quote
I fully support all forms of emergent gameplay, it is what makes EVE what it is. After all if I understand this correctly all bumpers give miners a way out by paying ISK so I don't see what the big deal is. In EVE if you can't defend what you do or get people to defend it for you then you have no right to do it when someone tries to stop you. This is in null sec with Cloakers and sov warfare and in high sec with bumpers now. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1172
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:23:00 -
[105] - Quote
Ahvram wrote:La Nariz wrote:In addition to my previous post if you remove ways of affecting highsec players without adding others you make the game itself less interesting. Look at the forum threads and the two opposing websites, something as simple as bumping has spawned as examples of this. Without this simple mechanic, bumping, none of that would have happened and highsec would be that much more dull. Ask yourself this CCP, "do I really want to remove a key tool in creating content for my game just to appease a minority of loud whiners?" I read "Dont take away our easy completely no risk way of exploiting High sec players as we lack the ability to do so in a legitimate way" Thats the real issue here and no other. So many long winded aurguments when this is the only real reason.
People can & do, take the loot from freighters after we've pulled off a gank. People can & do engage us as soon as we go GCC, sometimes preventing us from successfully ganking the target. Tell us more about this risk-free source of income mister npc corp guy. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
Murk Paradox
Solenus Directive Rieos Coalition
8
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:23:00 -
[106] - Quote
Rodtrik wrote:At first, I thought miner bumping was hilarious. Pitifully so, as most gankers seemed to join the band wagon in response to the barge buff, but nonetheless humorous. I even saw profit potential for selling gank ships and mining barges in affected systems. Then I actually watched them do it, and watched the interactions. In any other game, in any other situation, and especially in any place in the real world, what I saw was harassment and would have been treated as such legally.
Eve is indeed a dark and dystopian game, but as said before, it is a game. Games are meant to be enjoyed. There is no joy here, save for that of a few school yard bullies enjoying 0-risk griefing. Even with the upcoming bounty changes, these individuals would still be at no risk unless they happened to pod someone, and that someone happens to sell the rights to the bumper's death. IF that person even remembers he has a kill right on them, which I doubt many do.
In the end, this "emergent game play" has crossed a line. Eve is meant to be fun, frustrating, but fun. It is meant to encourage pvp and some griefing, not out right harassment with offending individuals hiding behind the guise of "emergent game play," and questionable sanctions. Nor is it meant to encourage targeted harassment. I am reminded of the Mittani and his antics at Fan Fest, which subsequently led to his ban. Granted the situation is not comparable to what the Mittani did, but it is nonetheless a form of targeted harassment.
It's sad to see any kind of condoning for this behavior. A gank is one thing, this is another. The only emergent thing about this situation, is an emergent testing method to determine how much harassment and grief casual gamers and players will take before they vote with their wallet and seek more welcoming fields. I know of a few who already have, much to my disappointment.
I wish for Eve to thrive, not die because a few angry gankers want their tears.
To paraphrase and reiterate.... and by all means correct me if I'm wrong, but you are essentially saying that miners only mine as the one ONLY fun thing to do in the game, and that people who bump miners, who obviously have done more than mine, are at fault because they are doing only ONE facet of "emergent gameplay" that in fact creates some content, and maybe even some internet notoriety, at the miner's cost? But suicide ganking is encouraged and/or allowed(see; Hulkageddon)?
I don't see how referencing something unrelated concerning the Mittani has anything to do with this subject sicne that's before my time, but to each their own.
I'd rather lose 1 mining cycle, or even move to a different system, then have to refit my exhumer. Makes no sense.
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1172
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:24:00 -
[107] - Quote
Kan Ajyn wrote:I'm retired and disabled. I spend all my free time on the web and in the game of EVE. I have some bad health days when I have to AFK for 5 to 10 minutes at a time due to my health. This is when I usually ice mine in Abudban because it used to be a safe haven where I could play the game at the speed I was capable of. That has been taken away from me by the bumping and harrassment. I can now only play EVE on my good days leaving me nothing to do with myself on my bad days. New Order is making excuses for their bullying tactics and getting CCP to sanction their method of play. Every game that I've played in the past has had some safe haven players could run to when they wanted to chill out and just relax. Abudban was one of the safe havens a player could relax and still play the game
Now in my opinion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with bumping, its part of the game of EVE, bullying and extortion is part of the game of life, put the 2 together for a more realistic game. Sure, but a safe haven should be part of that also. There's not really anything wrong with selling a license for mining either but then it should it be a territory that's fought over then? Everybody should have to fight for a piece of the action but right now, what I'm hearing is wardec's are of no use. Let's say there's 100 diferent 'New Orders' all wanting 10 million isk from each miner for mining alowances in Abudban. Now for safe haven in abudban, a miner has to pay 100,000,000, and who's going to keep the rates from going any higher.
If bumping and mining licenses are going to be allowed Then why not put all mining areas in 0.3 and lower and make the people wanting to sell licenses, fight for the right to do so.
I almost won bingo with a single miner post. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
Ross Sylibus
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:26:00 -
[108] - Quote
Rodtrik wrote:
But it does not affect your dark and dangerous corner of the game...so?
The issue with your statement is that you suggest the person on the other end of your dialogue wants only a 'dark and dangerous corner of the game' when instead that person probably recalls when the entire game was dark and dangerous - not just some corner of it.
Is EVE a game where there is a safe, secure "high sec" space and a dark, dangerous "null sec space" with some variation in between? Or is EVE a game where it is dark and dangerous everywhere, with different rewards and different risks implied by the impact of the "local authorities" on how players are able to interact with the game? In the former scenario there should be no reward to interacting with other players in a non-consensual manner when in "safe space", and plenty of reward for doing it in "unsafe space". In the latter model, the rewards for interacting with other players in an aggressive way should actually be HIGHER in "high security" space, while the risks and costs are also higher - a variation in the magnitude on each end of the risk reward equation but not a substantive change in the final result, if you will.
A good example of a game like the former would be WoW, or LoTRO. An example of the extremes of the latter perspective might be PlanetSide. A good example of a mix would be...well...EVE...I don't know of any other good examples, which perhaps is why this problem is so hard to crack.
This is a question about the fundamental characteristics of the game, and part of the issue each side of this debate has is that they are not recognizing this clear deviation in world view between each other. It seems that both sides are assuming a shared viewpoint on what EVE is, when I would guess from the dialogue that they are in fact not seeing the game in the same way. I believe there are folks who feel very strongly that there should not be 'safe space' and 'unsafe space' - and that there is a reason there is a sliding grade of security level and not a 'safe zone' and a 'pvp zone'. Equally, I think there are many individuals who feel that there should be a clear separation between the two and players should have the choice to select which one.
Unfortunately EVE is constructed such that you cannot provide separate "safe" and "unsafe" space without impacting the other players who want something different, because we are all part of a single large dynamic universe. Other games get around this with things like "PvP Servers" while in EVE we need to take these issues on head-on and find the right balance. |
Nathalie LaPorte
Republic University Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:27:00 -
[109] - Quote
Kan Ajyn wrote:If bumping and mining licenses are going to be allowed Then why not put all mining areas in 0.3 and lower and make the people wanting to sell licenses, fight for the right to do so.
Just the ice fields would be enough, really. That's the main focus of minerbumping anyway.
Support. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1176
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:29:00 -
[110] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:M0N0 wrote:Plenty of pilots asking for a effective counter to bumping...
Can I ask on behalf of everyone else for an effective counter to afk mining ect? A few suggestion: Being afk for 3 minutes or more gives you an aggression timer. Introducing a module that delays concord. Making afk against the rules. Allowing ore bays to be stolen from.
Any of the above are very much comparable to the popular requests from miners and would make the game more interesting instead of dull. Please, please stop asking for balancing or fairness - you already have it! Every ship in eve is able to bump but unlike mining it requires being at the keyboard AKA playing the game. In my opinion if anything barges need to be nerfed, 80,000 EHP is insane for a ship that can also go 1km/s with merely an AB(yes i am talking about the skiff).
All that being said I think the best thing for CCP to do is concentrate on making mining more intresting/engaging rather than afk/safe. I'm pretty sure AFK mining is already against the rules its just a sticky situation because mining game play is terrible:
The issue would be solved if mining lasers could not auto-repeat. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
|
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
270
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:33:00 -
[111] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:La Nariz wrote:M0N0 wrote:Plenty of pilots asking for a effective counter to bumping...
Can I ask on behalf of everyone else for an effective counter to afk mining ect? A few suggestion: Being afk for 3 minutes or more gives you an aggression timer. Introducing a module that delays concord. Making afk against the rules. Allowing ore bays to be stolen from.
Any of the above are very much comparable to the popular requests from miners and would make the game more interesting instead of dull. Please, please stop asking for balancing or fairness - you already have it! Every ship in eve is able to bump but unlike mining it requires being at the keyboard AKA playing the game. In my opinion if anything barges need to be nerfed, 80,000 EHP is insane for a ship that can also go 1km/s with merely an AB(yes i am talking about the skiff).
All that being said I think the best thing for CCP to do is concentrate on making mining more intresting/engaging rather than afk/safe. I'm pretty sure AFK mining is already against the rules its just a sticky situation because mining game play is terrible: The issue would be solved if mining lasers could not auto-repeat.
Yep it would probably be much easier to catch mining bots as well.
Can Not Auto Repeat = 1 npc alts aren't people |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1176
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:35:00 -
[112] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:The issue would be solved if mining lasers could not auto-repeat. Yep it would probably be much easier to catch mining bots as well. Can Not Auto Repeat = 1
Make it happen CCP Soundwave. The mining community is counting on YOU to make their playstyle more interesting. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:39:00 -
[113] - Quote
I find these whines for bumping nerf unbelievable.
I have been away from the game for over 4 years. I cannot imagine miners whining for bumping nerf back at 2008 to make it easier to AFK mine and/or bot. Back then most sane miners hated the bots. Now it is all upside down, a part of the miner community embraces the bot-like AFK playing style.
The bumping represents one of the core values of Eve. Other people can and will make your activities harder, especially if you are not prepared, or like in this case, do not even want to prepare or adapt. Lets ignore the fact that bumping does not cause the target any lasting damage or harm for the sake of argument.
Bumping is very easy to avoid. The people doing it are usually in one (1) system: if their demand for 10m isk is too much, is it that hard to move to the next system? What the biggest issue is in my opinion is the sense on entitlement to mine anywhere and anytime they choose. It hurts their pride to have to react to other people in any way, i.e. they reject the idea of multiplayer Eve. This is even more disturbing when you realize the miners are already part of the mining/market PVP even if they do not admit it themselves, it is just that the PVP must be allowed only for them, not the others.
The pro-nerf crowd consist mainly of a handful of vocal individuals who feel that the recent mining ship buff was not enough as it does not include total invulnerability towards the rest of Eve. They refuse to move from the affected systems because their pride has been hurt, some even participating in very dubious methods like claiming death threats or other rl violence to get some attention. The whole thing has been blown up from all proportions by few pearl-clutching individuals.
Save bumping. Save the Eve we all love. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further!
|
Ahvram
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:41:00 -
[114] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Ahvram wrote:La Nariz wrote:In addition to my previous post if you remove ways of affecting highsec players without adding others you make the game itself less interesting. Look at the forum threads and the two opposing websites, something as simple as bumping has spawned as examples of this. Without this simple mechanic, bumping, none of that would have happened and highsec would be that much more dull. Ask yourself this CCP, "do I really want to remove a key tool in creating content for my game just to appease a minority of loud whiners?" I read "Dont take away our easy completely no risk way of exploiting High sec players as we lack the ability to do so in a legitimate way" Thats the real issue here and no other. So many long winded aurguments when this is the only real reason. People can & do, take the loot from freighters after we've pulled off a gank. People can & do engage us as soon as we go GCC, sometimes preventing us from successfully ganking the target. Tell us more about this risk-free source of income mister npc corp guy.
Right because pushing miners around belts and demanding ISK to stop is full of risk. As far as frieghters go you need this exploit to pull off your ganks and know for a fact its what lets you do so. Its warp scramming with no recorse. Defend it all you like but thats what it is. The ability to disable a players ship without them having any option to survive. |
Kayla Miromme
Life sucks then you die Ltd.
8
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:01:00 -
[115] - Quote
MTB BR wrote:Kayla Miromme wrote:This thread seems to be changing from a discussion on bumping to a discussion on The New Order of HIghsec, which I doubt is what was intended.
I am a miner. When it comes to the actual mechanic of bumping, I see no reason to change it. The system works fine as it is, and I disagree with anyone who whines or complains about needing an anchor mod or some other gameplay change. Im sure its working for you. you the one that suport then. "Proud supporter of James 315 and the New Order of Hisec. www.minerbumping.com" your this is not your Bio??
It is, because I support the New Order. I make no such claim otherwise.
My point is that the actual mechanic of bumping is not broken and does not need to be addressed. If someone bumps you, deal with it by paying up or finding a way around it. |
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:07:00 -
[116] - Quote
Ahvram wrote: Right because pushing miners around belts and demanding ISK to stop is full of risk.
The risks for both parties are 0. QED. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1184
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:13:00 -
[117] - Quote
Ahvram wrote:Right because pushing miners around belts and demanding ISK to stop is full of risk. As far as frieghters go you need this exploit to pull off your ganks and know for a fact its what lets you do so. Its warp scramming with no recorse. Defend it all you like but thats what it is. The ability to disable a players ship without them having any option to survive.
Yet all the while they do have options to survive this action that is not an exploit. It simply comes down to the one thing I've been saying for months now: They choose not to use the options available to avoid it. They choose to be victims.
I could recount many instances of where a target has survived by out-smarting us. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2180
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:22:00 -
[118] - Quote
Bumping is a mechanic that is a cornerstone of all sorts of PvP-related occupations, ranging from docking games to ganking. The only form of bumping there has been any problem with is the bumping of miners in asteroid belts.
The problem anti-bumping advocates have with miner bumping is not with bumping itself either, it is to do with the lack of recourse or ways to strike back at the bumpers. In other words, with wardecs, NPC corps, dec shields and so on the way they are, it is extremely difficult or impossible to fight of mining bumpers. This is not a problem with bumping. It is at it s core a problem with engaging in nonconsensual PVP in hisec. |
Myxx
648
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:28:00 -
[119] - Quote
bumping is a viable tactic both for being a poor-man's tackle and giving miners/freighter pilots/others in general a hard time. it should be left as is, policy wise. there are ways to avoid it (orbiting, moving faster than the bumping ship, moving belts, etc) that people can use that would negate any real harassment from it. |
Construticon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:32:00 -
[120] - Quote
Everyone in Abudban that mines and complains needs to step back from the keyboard and relax. I have made it sporting and enjoy the banter with the exception of a few of the complainers. Eve online is a game and nothing more. Pay the 10m ISK to mine and you get left alone. Don't pay and get bumped. Have fun with it.
You can ask many of the New Order Agents I have made it sporting and fun when I figure out ways to avoid the bumps. I didn't even mine ice till the new order showed up. Local chat in the system is alive and well thanks to the New Order. Far too many systems have nothing but miners that are AFK and no interaction with other players. At least in this case the miners are talking even if it is complaining.
If you really have a problem with the bumping and want to do something about it, gank them, pay them or leave the system and mine somewhere else. Just remember to win in the ganking game you have to break their will and make them want to quit bumping and odds are that it won't happen. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |