| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Albert Wittmann
6
   |
Posted - 2012.12.16 10:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello CCP,
do you like gamemechanics which cannot stopped by players with modules or/and starting CONCORD?
We can bump freighters with mwd-battleships and the freighters flip away like shrapnels, ok, sometime the Corporation of the bumped Freighter will come with some Webber-Modules-fitted ships and want to stop the flight of the bumped freighter, but woops, the webbers dont work on bump-induced speeds ...
So, how i can counter this manveuver without starting CONCORD? |
Lexar Mundi
DYNAMIC INTERVENTION
ORPHANS OF EVE
26
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 05:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Albert Wittmann wrote:Hello CCP,
do you like gamemechanics which cannot stopped by players with modules or/and starting CONCORD?
We can bump freighters with mwd-battleships and the freighters flip away like shrapnels, ok, sometime the Corporation of the bumped Freighter will come with some Webber-Modules-fitted ships and want to stop the flight of the bumped freighter, but woops, the webbers dont work on bump-induced speeds ...
So, how i can counter this manveuver without starting CONCORD?
I think bumping freighters just for the heck of it is a reportable offence. Bumping miners just for the heck of it on the other hand is not.... not sure why
also to have a true proposal, please put an idea not just "omgwtfbbq my freighters been bumped for 3 hours help meh" |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
Bitten.
694
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 10:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Bumping mechanics are fine, you're just bad.
ps web the freighters before they get bumped |
Stegas Tyrano
GLU CANU
Open Space Consultancy
66
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 12:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Is this not possible in freighters? |
Xander Kross
Black Rise Escape Hatch
Zero Hour Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.22 16:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
all ships should get damaged when they hit a nother ship, so if a frig bumps a freighter it should be squashed
|
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
381
|
Posted - 2012.12.23 21:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
Xander Kross wrote:all ships should get damaged when they hit a nother ship, so if a frig bumps a freighter it should be squashed
Hows that going to work out at station exits? Jita 4.4 for example
Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. |
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
10921
|
Posted - 2012.12.25 08:03:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jint Hikaru wrote:Xander Kross wrote:all ships should get damaged when they hit a nother ship, so if a frig bumps a freighter it should be squashed
Hows that going to work out at station exits? Jita 4.4 for example For him to know that, he would have had to have thought the idea threw first. We can't have that now, can we?
CCP Zulu.....
Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Lola Isabel
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 20:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
bumping should be prohibited , doesn't matter if they are miners , haulers , pre-warping any ship
if a convo spam is prohibited , bumping should be too. |
Zol Interbottom
Nanotrasen Inc
36
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 11:43:00 -
[9] - Quote
Lola Isabel wrote:bumping should be prohibited , doesn't matter if they are miners , haulers , pre-warping any ship
if a convo spam is prohibited , bumping should be too.
Perhaps just bumping for blackmail purposes as bumping is a very useful tool for other purposes, especially in PVP
Nivin Sajjad > we fly perpetually networked, neural interfaced spaceships yet can't communicate coordinates to each other without physically passing back and forth little pieces of paper. it's weird |
Lola Isabel
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 15:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Zol Interbottom wrote:Lola Isabel wrote:bumping should be prohibited , doesn't matter if they are miners , haulers , pre-warping any ship
if a convo spam is prohibited , bumping should be too. Perhaps just bumping for blackmail purposes as bumping is a very useful tool for other purposes, especially in PVP
convo spaming was good too in pvp especially in shooting carriers |
|
|
Thomas Gore
Blackfyre Enterprise
132
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 12:25:00 -
[11] - Quote
The only way to "rework" bumping is to remove it completely - i.e. make the ships fly through each other. It's not like the physics are in very central role in EVE anyway... |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade
The East India Co.
706
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 14:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Thomas Gore wrote:The only way to "rework" bumping is to remove it completely - i.e. make the ships fly through each other. It's not like the physics are in very central role in EVE anyway...
That's the only way that doesn't make the problem worse. it's still a bad idea, but it's the best bad idea of the lot.
That said, my signature is appropriate to this topic.
Bumping, leave it alone. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 18:19:00 -
[13] - Quote
Lola Isabel wrote:bumping should be prohibited , doesn't matter if they are miners , haulers , pre-warping any ship
if a convo spam is prohibited , bumping should be too.
Convo spam was abusing a coding issue that CCP admitted existed wherein the spam did cause players to lag if not disconnect. It's a very different mechanism from bumping and conflating the two is silly.
You may know me better as Corestwo: https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/corestwo
This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Zol Interbottom
Nanotrasen Inc
60
|
Posted - 2013.01.03 02:24:00 -
[14] - Quote
Lola Isabel wrote:Zol Interbottom wrote:Lola Isabel wrote:bumping should be prohibited , doesn't matter if they are miners , haulers , pre-warping any ship
if a convo spam is prohibited , bumping should be too. Perhaps just bumping for blackmail purposes as bumping is a very useful tool for other purposes, especially in PVP convo spaming was good too in pvp especially in shooting carriers
your silly, bumping is ramming s spaceship into another, convo spamming is lagging a client until they disconnect
Nivin Sajjad > we fly perpetually networked, neural interfaced spaceships yet can't communicate coordinates to each other without physically passing back and forth little pieces of paper. it's weird |
iskflakes
Magnets Inc.
236
|
Posted - 2013.01.03 04:05:00 -
[15] - Quote
There are two changes I would make:
1) Reduce MWD mass increase, which will dramatically decrease the effectiveness of bumping
2) Allow ships to align despite bumping. I don't believe you should be able to keep a ship tackled just by bumping it.. it seems like an abuse to me.
Track your wealth with EVEStats - https://ohheck.co.uk/EVEStats/home.php |
Stegas Tyrano
GLU CANU
Open Space Consultancy
127
|
Posted - 2013.01.03 15:12:00 -
[16] - Quote
What if Item Mass added to a Ships Mass so that a full freighter would be impossible to bump while an empty one would be easier?
INGAME ADVERTS FOR PLAYERS |
stg213
Loneops
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.05 10:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
Jint Hikaru wrote:Xander Kross wrote:all ships should get damaged when they hit a nother ship, so if a frig bumps a freighter it should be squashed
Hows that going to work out at station exits? Jita 4.4 for example
How about EVE starting to make some f**in sense ?
1) what the is "bump mechanics" anyway ? the magical push of a ship by another through sheer willpower / pixie-dust ?
2) the station exit mechanics is a sad joke... especially in cases such as 4.4... 50 ships flying overlapped until one moves out of the "convergence bubble" then if you steer you bump in to the bubble and bounce off...
This is just a workaround for not implementing any decent physics into the game. The above is just like saying that broken mechanic A can't be fixed because mechanic B is broken also! Yes, both where workarounds from the start... instead of implementing a "sound" system, it's the easy way out, the cheap fast way where ships are nothing more than bounce-boxes in the engine.
How about a revolutionary approach to game-design? If you have 2 half-baked systems in the game: FIX BOTH!
1) Ship collision:
Shields will push back against shields -> at small speeds and similar mass the ships will SLOWLY push each other away, except if they are intentionally fly towards each other. => shields will be drained by this, just like any "projectile/beam" hitting the shield
If the speed exceeds what the shield can push back => ships will crash into each other resulting in serious damage to both -> depending on the mass of each.
For example, a frig flying full mwd into a freighter will be a fly on the windshield... wish/wash... gone.
A battleship, ramming the same freighter at full mwd will result in the BS going boom and the freighter loosing ~ 10% shield and ~ 30% armor + 10% hull
(the pod of the rammer also going poof in both cases)
(yes, this will make high-sec ganking cheaper and easier)
2) Avoiding ship collisions / station exits:
Station exits are actually very easy to fix:
Stations are BIG! actually huge. Why not having them 5-8 exits instead of only 1 ?
Version 1 (more realistic and more difficult to implement properly): each station has 5-8 exits, ships are sent out through them in round-robin with a timer on each so that no ship is sent through the same hole in less than 5 seconds (maybe 10 ?... needs some testing).
Version 2 (cheaper - will prolly be favoured by ccp): just like stargates, place ships at random points in a random 20km radius of the station => problem solved
Avoiding collisions: while the safety is on, your ship will automatically try to avoid collisions -> if your ship is on a collision course with a ship less than 5000m away, it will break/steer away of the object. If a ship is on a collision course with you, your ship will try to get out of the way/move away from the incoming ship.
3) Possible fix for increased ease of ganking: if you intentionally (safety off) ram (accelerate into) another ship (in highsec), and cause serious (over 50%) damage to either ships, concord suspends your flight license for 30 (15 ?) days, leaving you unable to undock from the station in which your clone is / the first station you dock into (in addition if you don't dock, you also get a 5 min counter & warning to do so, if you don't you become suspect, for the duration of 30/15 days or until you dock)
...and I'm sure the above solutions will also uncover other bad mechanics in place, to which I say: fix them too! Keeping bad mechanics because fixing them will cause problems with other bad mechanics is not valid argument.
|
VonKolroth
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
28
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 09:28:00 -
[18] - Quote
This is a terrible thread, and bumping is one of the few ways to make many certain ships vulnerable at all. Honestly, the physics are fine and bumping is fine. If i really need to suspend my disbelief for ships 'bumping' of one another I'll just fancy the idea that shields repel one another. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |