Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3537
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 14:24:00 -
[211] - Quote
ZaBob wrote:Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.
It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).
There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.
A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.
Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it.
Orbit yo' Roids.
[Skiff, Bump-Proof]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II EM Ward Field II Upgraded Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I
Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Ancillary Current Router I [Empty Rig slot]
This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Garek Zosimo
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 18:05:00 -
[212] - Quote
Blue Absinthe wrote:CCP officially endorses the New Order of Highsec. Hats off to CCP. It was the right decision to let James clean highsec up.
You need to re-read CCP's statement because they specifically said they are NOT endorsing the conduct. They are merely allowing it to not be categorized as an exploit. |
Amyclas Amatin
sleep Deprivation INC. LLC The Kadeshi
109
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 21:21:00 -
[213] - Quote
Beachura wrote: However, if it becomes apparent that you are following an individual or set of individuals because due to the fact they responded to your troll mail badly you know you can upset them and ruin their game experience, the Game Masters have left themselves room so that you can't claim "Oh but it's a legal game mechanic" if it is clear your intent is to ruin an individuals game experience by following them around day and night.
Suppose I took a mercenary contract to kill a certain individual again and again and again. And the said victim also has a multi-billion isk bounty put on him for the sole purpose of his being killed again and again and again. I am deliberately ruining his game experience for profit. And the folks who put out the contract and bounty did so within the parameters of the game mechanics to encourage the killing of this victim. Is this harassment? Please help me with my survey on high-sec aggression: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dLcM27c_qDyOIxFgE4Zan_T8j_eZDDeCUAEL4lwXGC8/viewform |
Kiitsune Anstian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 04:01:00 -
[214] - Quote
My experience as a miner being bumped the people Bumping are specifically targeting the cyclical Ice belts to either ensure their alts get the majority of the harvest or try to harass everyone who is their mining.
I have literally had to squat at under 50 meters from the ice to limit their ability to shift me like a limpet and because I am harder to shift I then get focused to ensure I can't stay in range. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Caliban Logistics and Storage
9308
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 02:43:00 -
[215] - Quote
Kiitsune Anstian wrote:My experience as a miner being bumped the people Bumping are specifically targeting the cyclical Ice belts to either ensure their alts get the majority of the harvest or try to harass everyone who is their mining.
I have literally had to squat at under 50 meters from the ice to limit their ability to shift me like a limpet and because I am harder to shift I then get focused to ensure I can't stay in range.
Welcome to competition in the Ice fields, to maximise your profit, you must be prepared to make it difficult for your competitors to mine, it's good business sense.
I eat your hatred for breakfast, then wash it down with your tears. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1431
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:45:00 -
[216] - Quote
ZaBob wrote:Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.
It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).
There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.
A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.
Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it.
War dec us. Gank us. Pay us the fees you owe for operating in our systems. Take the miniscule effort to move system.
You have a number options available to you. Don't pretend like you don't have any choice at all though. That's just dishonest. |
jedijed
Thundercats The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 20:39:00 -
[217] - Quote
Bumping to the harcore degree
http://youtu.be/0MmIsrAQPM4 |
D35
Trianguli Australis
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 02:56:00 -
[218] - Quote
jedijed wrote:Bumping to the harcore degree http://youtu.be/0MmIsrAQPM4Being bumped by not one but 2 Machariels taking turns bumping me 450k off the gate i think falls under harrasment !! I would like to congratulate the bumpers for doing an amazing job by bumping this freighter to where it belongs |
jedijed
Thundercats The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 03:12:00 -
[219] - Quote
I would like to congratulate the bumpers for doing an amazing job by bumping this freighter to where it belongs[/quote] jesus theres so many haters in this game
i like pvp as much as anyone. i can accept haulers getting ganked. i can accept freightor and jf getting ganked by alpha fleets but bumping someone for a f******************************** hr is just over the top . |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
513
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 04:56:00 -
[220] - Quote
jedijed wrote: jesus theres so many haters in this game
i like pvp as much as anyone. i can accept haulers getting ganked. i can accept freightor and jf getting ganked by alpha fleets but bumping someone for a f******************************** hr is just over the top .
So is the video where you accidentally recorded that autopilot to 0 hack or did you cut that out in the new version? |
|
WonkySplitDemon
Red Dawn Mercenaries
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 06:26:00 -
[221] - Quote
jedijed wrote:I would like to congratulate the bumpers for doing an amazing job by bumping this freighter to where it belongs jesus theres so many haters in this game
i like pvp as much as anyone. i can accept haulers getting ganked. i can accept freightor and jf getting ganked by alpha fleets but bumping someone for a f******************************** hr is just over the top .[/quote]
Just give up before you embarass yourself any further |
jedijed
Thundercats The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 06:32:00 -
[222] - Quote
I dont really care what you think about me . Im doing this more so for the next person . most people dont get to record u guys greifing them for an hr . most people arent smart enuff to get concord on grid to insta ur gank fleet . This is the 2 things that makes this gank unusual. Extreme is more appropriate
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=254193 |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15137
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 08:00:00 -
[223] - Quote
jedijed wrote:I dont really care what you think about me . Im doing this more so for the next person . most people dont get to record u guys greifing them for an hr . most people arent smart enuff to get concord on grid to insta ur gank fleet . This is the 2 things that makes this gank unusual. Extreme is more appropriate Most people are not smart enough, full stop. This is yet another reason why, it's working as intended.
Oh and just how do you warp to zero, when using AP?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
118
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 18:18:00 -
[224] - Quote
The equating of locating and pursuing a miner to continual-bump him as 'harassment' smacks of continued road-to-nerfdom crap, IMHO.
Consider, it's ok to declare war on a player corp, run locates and ruthlessly hunt a player down and pop his ship (repeatedly if he keeps flying blingy tasty morsels); yet somehow the continual hunting and bumping of a carebears mining ship becomes 'harassment'...
What if that miner shot off his mouth in local? Smacked talked during a previous engagement? Brought said bumping 'harassment' upon himself?
CCP, Is EVE an emergent self-regulating 'retribution' sandbox or not?
I'm having trouble telling between the marketing and reality difference here, because one would think said miner would just be expected to dec the agressor pilot (corp), hire mercs to do it for him, take some retributive action...not rely on being bubble-wrapped by CCP with non-code mandates on a fricken website...
As I've often said, if something is worth having a 'rule' for, then its worth CODING for it so the impact is equally and objectively applied across the community. What CCP unfortunately sets up with their GM 'rulings' and mandates like this is sadly akin to the russian judge at the olympics scoring interpretive dance based on his whims (or what he had for lunch that day...)
If CCP implemented these ''rules' or protections for the poor carebears by code -- making someone go suspect after bumping another players ship above a certain number of times within a certain time period, then at least the mechanic is evenly and uniformly applied, experienced and debated by the community. Problem here is CCP is trying to have their cake and eat it too, avoid implementing code changes that will cause rebellion, but issuing nerfing 'rules' through their web site.
FAIL http://evedarklord.blogspot.ca |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
429
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 18:22:00 -
[225] - Quote
Mag's wrote:jedijed wrote:I dont really care what you think about me . Im doing this more so for the next person . most people dont get to record u guys greifing them for an hr . most people arent smart enuff to get concord on grid to insta ur gank fleet . This is the 2 things that makes this gank unusual. Extreme is more appropriate Most people are not smart enough, full stop. This is yet another reason why, it's working as intended. Oh and just how do you warp to zero, when using AP?
You warp before the AP initiates it. (Spam jump button) "Never rub another man's rhubarb." -Joker in Batman (Jack Nicholson) Just get a catalyst, blow him up and the post in local "Just a friendly reminder that I'm mining here and not you." -Abrazzar
|
ZaBob
Twilight Labs Unsung Voices
289
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 14:48:00 -
[226] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:ZaBob wrote:Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.
It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).
There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.
A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.
Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it. War dec us. Gank us. Pay us the fees you owe for operating in our systems. Take the miniscule effort to move system. You have a number options available to you. Don't pretend like you don't have any choice at all though. That's just dishonest.
Ah, you didn't actually read what I wrote, did you?
But pay a "fee" for operating in "your" system? I *never* pay ransoms. Get lost, twerp. |
ZaBob
Twilight Labs Unsung Voices
289
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 15:20:00 -
[227] - Quote
D35 wrote:ZaBob wrote:Moving to a different system to avoid a bumper is going to be pretty annoying if you have to move your equipment, fleet, arrange to haul ore to the refinery, etc.
It becomes even more of a pain, when it's ice that you're mining. The amount of wasted time just to avoid someone who's persistently acting like a 7th grade bully is even more annoying. Ice mining is time-consuming as it is (and CCP just made it more annoying IMO).
There's an imbalance here. The bumper gets to do what he wants, with no consequences. The ice miner has to pick up and move a long way away -- a harsh penalty (relative to the effort required to impose it) to which he has no realistic recourse.
A wardec against the bumper is not generally a realistic option. You drag entire corporations into it, multiplying the cost. I suppose an alt corp for the purpose might be an option, but even so, that's a lot of hassle just to deal with someone being a jerk.
Bottom line -- to me, it seems like griefing once it gets to the point I'd have to spend all that time just to be allowed to play the game. Or give us a reasonable mechanic to counter it. I don't see any imbalance here since there is one mechanic that completely protects you from bumping: Moving out of the way. No bumper will waste their time trying to bump something which they can't. I've seen some miners refusing to do this, deliberately making themselves "victims", because of their principles. But seriously, it's not hard to double click the space.
Have you actually mined ice? Mining ships are slow (hard to move out of the way), and mining lasers have limited range, so if you end up out-of-range, you end up with nothing for that entire long cycle. "Moving out of the way" is likely to have the same result as getting yourself bumped.
All I'm suggesting is that the playing field ought be a bit more balanced. Like maybe if someone collides with you (perhaps repeatedly), you get the right to web them, so you CAN get out of the way next time. You have to give something up in your fitting to fit the web.
I don't like the idea of petitioning any more than I like the idea of packing up operations and moving a long way away. I'd rather be able to deal with it myself with a reasonable mechanic.
Someone suggested hugging the ice to make it hard to bump you away. That might work if the bumper isn't good at 3D geometry, but it makes it harder to avoid bumping, and harder to escape a gank. But if combining that with "keep at range" lets you stay in mining laser range then it's a counter-mechanic. (It doesn't matter that "keep at range" is automatic -- you can't do any better than that manually, so I'm using it as a reference point).
But I bet two bumpers working together can force you out of range even so. But so far, I've not seen tag team bumpers where both were sufficiently juvenile to persist for an hour.
Merc contracts? Need a wardec, and way too slow to be effective. Bounty, likewise.
Maybe being able to declare a short-term wardec, maybe 24 hours, limited to one constellation, 15 minute notice, limitted to you and your target (not your corp)? Allow allies, so you can hire a merc or bring in an alt or corpmate (since you're sitting in a mining ship).
If this were more balanced, there'd be no need for CCP to declare it an exploit even if they DO follow you around. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3608
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 18:35:00 -
[228] - Quote
ZaBob wrote:Have you actually mined ice? Mining ships are slow (hard to move out of the way), and mining lasers have limited range, so if you end up out-of-range, you end up with nothing for that entire long cycle. "Moving out of the way" is likely to have the same result as getting yourself bumped.
No they aren't (644m/s), and learn to fly better so you don't fly yourself out of range. [Skiff, Bump-Proof]
Ice Harvester Upgrade II Ice Harvester Upgrade II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Limited 'Anointed' EM Ward Field Upgraded Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I
Ice Harvester II
Medium Ancillary Current Router I [Empty Rig slot]
Quote:All I'm suggesting is that the playing field ought be a bit more balanced. Like maybe if someone collides with you (perhaps repeatedly), you get the right to web them, so you CAN get out of the way next time. You have to give something up in your fitting to fit the web.
Mmmm, aggression rights against freighters in Jita. Delicious idea.
Quote:Someone suggested hugging the ice to make it hard to bump you away. That might work if the bumper isn't good at 3D geometry, but it makes it harder to avoid bumping, and harder to escape a gank. But if combining that with "keep at range" lets you stay in mining laser range then it's a counter-mechanic. (It doesn't matter that "keep at range" is automatic -- you can't do any better than that manually, so I'm using it as a reference point).
You can do way, way better than keep at range does.
Quote:But I bet two bumpers working together can force you out of range even so. But so far, I've not seen tag team bumpers where both were sufficiently juvenile to persist for an hour.
2 people needed to disrupt the activities of one? Sounds balanced to me. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Callathar Tivianne
Unseen Academy The Unseen Company
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 13:15:00 -
[229] - Quote
i love it when carebear is making tear thread, he's flamed to death, but when ccp makes a little gesture towards mentioned carebear, big bad piwhates are QQ themself :P hipocrisy...? |
disillusional
Big Red Wardec Co Petition Blizzard
28
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 12:57:00 -
[230] - Quote
I disagree with the GM on this, everybody knows that people shouldn't be able to mine in hi-sec without some element of pain and grief. To kowtow to the pathetic tears of miners who clearly can't deal with a bit of "banter" in system is pathetic. The first thought that came into my head when I read this post was that EVE Online was adopting the same kind of heavy handed, community destroying moderation which besets World of Warcraft. EVE is about being able to do whatever you want, whenever you want so long as it's within the rules and the EULA, bumping another player repeatedly in my opinion is not harassment, there is no abuse or threats.
In retrospect the thought of a retriever being bumped repeatedly to the point the pilot decides to lodge a petition makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. |
|
Khaos Wildfire
47th Space Militia
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 07:50:00 -
[231] - Quote
I have recently returned to Eve to reconnect with old friends and have been trying to get caught up with many of the new changes.
I have considered extortion to make money in previous years, similar to what is going on now, so I'll bring everything out so as to hopefully shed some light and concern on this entire situation.
First of all, I've done a few ganks in high sec on poor miners. At least last year 1 catalyst with T2 mods could kill any mack in .5 space that did not have defenses. I did it for no reason other than being bored and needed refueled on tears.
I have also done a fair share of mining on alts. Sometimes I'd rather watch a movie but still make a few million isk.
There are a number of game mechanics that I would like to call into question here. Some have been poorly and vaguely addressed in this thread already, but I will extrapolate on them to make a few points.
First - this talking about bumping and harassment. Okay, that's fine if CCP wants to eventually call it harassment. I don't think that someone should be followed for hours on end, after all, CCP realizes miners (or anyone) are paying to play this game and will quit if they do not get to play....it's just good business.
However, bumping someone to effectively warp scramble them is definitely a cause for concern. It does avoid any negative effects associated with high sec piracy. Also - accounts can be created daily in order to make sure that your "bumping" ship isn't set to red - allowing you to access any system for scouting and bumping purposes. This means that setting these 'scout/bumpers" is not effective. It also means dozens of alts are created each day just for this purpose.
But that in of itself is not what is causing high sec miners to be concerned. (And for the sake of argument, lets remove the botting from the picture.) This bumping is associated not with ONLY with harassment - but with extremely costly ship destructions by -10 players in frigs and destroyers/
Their tactics are simple - emerge from low sec, avoid NPC destruction, and proceed to the system and belt in question. Then the neutral scout bumps the miner to warp scramble them, the -10 players warp to scout, dogpile on the miner, and everyone dies, except the bumper, who then scoops loot.
Extremely effective - and has been happening for most of Eve's history, just never at these levels.
This calls into question the intention and integrity of Security Status as a game mechanic if it's actually effective. It's intention was to stop pilots from flying around -10 blowing up other players in high sec... but in this day in Eve it's not actually stopping them. Eventually players who go -5 are, in theory, not allowed to fly around high sec. This is their punishment for not playing nice. But in this case there are no punishments - they will just refit into another ship and come back again to gank someone else.
I do not understand how avoiding ship destruction by avoiding Concord after an act of aggression is considered an exploit but avoiding ship destruction from various NPC patrols of pilots currently banned from high sec isn't.
Whatever happened to the days where players who went -10 got their sec status back up in order to gank someone?
So in closing, I think that bumping is not only about harassment, but about avoiding aggression (and I do not have a recommended solution, just making a point) and that I do not believe that Security Status matters for these low risk/high reward ganks of passive players in Eve.
I am not in favor of making everyone 100% safe in high sec nor am I offering any suggestions or advice on changing anything. I am only pointing out somethings that I see as a potential issue. This can only get worse.... can you imagine the extortion + Hulkageddon?
Thank you for your time if you read this entire post.
Khaos Wildfire
TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.
|
Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
183
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 17:07:00 -
[232] - Quote
Khaos Wildfire wrote:
TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.
You are confusing two different things. Bumping as an alternative to warp scrambling is related to freighter ganking which this thread is not about. Miner ganking rarely (maybe never) involves bumping of the target.
Instead there is usually a scout ship that positions itself right next to the miner, who, being an afking botter, does not respond like a person would and continues to melt rock or ice. Then, the ganker, either a fleet or solo, leaves station, instawarps to a bookmark and then warps to the scout. Landing on top of the oblivious target the ganker then locks, fires and confiscates the illegal mining equipment. The pod too if there is time before CONCORD arrives. The ganker then warps his pod to station, grabs a noob ship, leaves station and pulls CONCORD to him, clearing the belt for the next event. If at any time the ganker pauses in this chain, faction police show up and ruin the whole thing. Or the group of players collectively known as "vultures" disrupt it at some point, of which there are several particularly vulnerable.
See any bumping in there? No, because there isn't any.
Bumping involves using fast but massive ships to separate miners from their mineral or ice targets. It is done repeatedly because, miners being a rather stubborn and unimaginative bunch, it takes a while for them to realize that we bumpers MEAN it when we say they have to buy a permit and follow The Code or no mining for them.... This whole issue arose because the miners were unwilling to either just do what we say or take any of the several but not extremely pleasant options they had to stop us. So, being carebears they demanded CCP fix it for them.
In this thread CCP said no. sort of.
Highsec is worth fighing for.
BBB |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3718
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 22:36:00 -
[233] - Quote
Khaos Wildfire wrote:TL:DR - Bumping is more about avoiding aggression than harassment. -10 pirate gangs in frigs ganking players in high sec should be a cause for concern - security status has lost it's integrity.
Security status has not ever been a mechanism for keeping you safe. It is a mechanism for telling the faction police who to hunt. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Dalto Bane
Knights of the Posing Meat The Obsidian Front
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 22:12:00 -
[234] - Quote
Good stance on this CCP! I take special acceptance to the "case by case" attitude because some miner bumping is going to happen, and rightfully so, for all you afk and/or macro miners out there. I, as I am sure you all have seen where some people take it too far with the bumping to a level where it does seem like harassment. |
Haramir Haleths
Nutella Bande
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 14:43:00 -
[235] - Quote
Bumping is bad game mechanic roleplaying wise. Spaceships shouldn't bump without any damage. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3746
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 17:12:00 -
[236] - Quote
Haramir Haleths wrote:Bumping is bad game mechanic roleplaying wise. Spaceships shouldn't bump without any damage.
So which option do you prefer?
CONCORD does the ganking of Freighters for us or Ganking in HS no longer requires you to lose your ship.
Because, depending on whether or not bumping damage counts as aggression, those are the possible results.
(As for lolRP, shields act as buffers > no damage as the collisions aren't sufficiently energetic) This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
ELWhappo Sanchez
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 01:41:00 -
[237] - Quote
ccp can fix this if they wanted to. just make the bumper bounce off if the other ship is mining. that way no other game play would be effected ie gates and undocks. harassing and griefing miners by bumping should be gone from the game. no reason for ccp to not fix it. |
Laurianne Leone
NEW ORDER DEATH DEALERS CODE.
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 00:03:00 -
[238] - Quote
ELWhappo Sanchez wrote:ccp can fix this if they wanted to. just make the bumper bounce off if the other ship is mining. that way no other game play would be effected ie gates and undocks. harassing and griefing miners by bumping should be gone from the game. no reason for ccp to not fix it.
But they don't want to fix it and are (I speculate) enjoying seeing the conflict this behaviour sparks between players, now that you are actually playing the game rather than just alt tabbing and clicking a button once per hour harvesting Isk.
So read the op, digest it, then stop whining and deal with it. |
ELWhappo Sanchez
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 03:27:00 -
[239] - Quote
miner bumping is a broken game mechanic and the new order are just turds in the eve punch bowl plain and simple. you can come in my wh any time and try to bump me any time honey. |
Omar Alharazaad
ZomCom
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 17:17:00 -
[240] - Quote
Making a ship that is currently mining an immovable object would backfire horribly. All the bad men would have to do is send in a few rookie ships with their civilian mining lasers, form up around your barge and start mining.... suddenly you cannot move. I think we know what happens shortly thereafter, yes? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |