|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
3101
   |
Posted - 2014.03.14 02:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
Lakotnik wrote:IIshira wrote:Lakotnik wrote:Bumping should have consequences dependant on the mass difference between the two vessels.
Frigate trying to bump a freighter = dead frigate. Freighter doesn't budge.
Destroyer/cruiser bumping a Mining barge = Mining barge is bumped, but destroyer/cruiser gets damaged.
Freighter bumping a capital = freighter takes some damage and bumps the capital out of alignment.
Let's make it interesting for everybody. Equal risk vs. reward when you're trying to bump a tanker with a rowboat. Realistically you couldn't "bump" with spaceships. Doing so would cause massive damage to at least one of the ships. Problem is no one wants to turn Eve into bumper cars. When it comes to aggro mechanics it would be impossible for the server to accurately determine if a bump was intentional. As I said before just remove this failure of a game mechanic. Doesn't matter if it's intentional or not. Damage occurs when two ships bump eachother. When there's a smaller mass involved with greater, the results are quite predictable. What we have now, isn't "Flight computers taking evasive actions", since my freighters can't actually perform maneuevers like that normally that it doesnt when a cruiser with 100MN MWD bumps into me. Equal risk/opportunity. Big fleets, two ships lost due to bumping, nothing wrong with that. It'd level the playing field for everyone.
So... you're telling me that I would only need to use 50-60 mil worth of Stabbers to gank a Freighter under your idea?
Sign me up.
Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
9339
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 02:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:**** like bumping orcas for 15-30 minutes straight for multiple waves of gank characters is why this game is dying.
The game isn't dying(that's just a fallacy that dishonest people use to campaign for bad change), and those people should bring web alts and use scouts.
Hint, if your scout sees two Machariels on a gate, don't jump through it.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11120
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 00:56:07 -
[3] - Quote
Scott Bacon wrote:
I appreciate you mentioning the Higgs Anchor. It's actually close to what I am talking about, though I have never experimented with one to see how effective it is. What I don't like about the Higgs Anchor is that it's a rig and cannot be equipped on freighters.
It still baffles me that people fail to realize that freighters intentionally have weaknesses. Or that they might once have had rigs, but QQ put an end to that right quick.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11331
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 02:23:37 -
[4] - Quote
Ebola IV wrote:The solution is easy indeed: Just add a counter for bumping the same ship within a given time (like 5 minutes). After counter reaches 2 give a global warning to the bumper; After it hits 3 add a suspect flag to the bumper.
I can think of a few ways off the top of my head to use such a mechanic in ways that you won't like.
Nevermind that it begs the question "why should the people who are afk be given protections of any kind?" (although your suggestion would, in fact, hurt them very badly by letting clever people flag literally any hauler they feel like without consequence)
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11389
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 00:18:59 -
[5] - Quote
Ebola IV wrote:Tell me more, I'm curious 
Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times.
Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11445
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:25:02 -
[6] - Quote
Ebola IV wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ebola IV wrote:Tell me more, I'm curious Hopefully it hasn't escaped your attention that it isn't all that tricky to have a few people bump the gank target into someone else, several times. Boom, instant free flag, no 15 minute GCC. Much, much less people required to gank a freighter, too, so CODE could start camping way more areas, more often, more effectively. This would apply, if the system doesn't/can't decide between bumper and bumpee. Thats true. But as I already said: My suggestion would need a proper implementation which actually CAN decide between the former and the latter. If it can't, it fails and would make ganking even easier than it's now ;)
They can't even add alliance bookmarks, what makes you think they can possibly recode the game's base physics engine from the ground up?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
12790
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 15:00:35 -
[7] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:
What more do you want?
You know perfectly well what they want.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
|
|
| |
|