Probably around the time you explain what the problem isGǪ

Less snark: when the mechanics stop working as intended. It's really as simple as that.

Explained pretty plainly in the video description. I tend to agree that completely disabling a person in high sec without concord intervention is not working as intended.

Looks like the OP was bumped by a neutral Macheriel so he/she couldn't get back to gate. The DEVs don't consider this an exploit.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=199310&find=unread


And FYI... CCP will not take any action based on evidence provided by a player. It's easy to falsify.

Explained pretty plainly in the video description. I tend to agree that completely disabling a person in high sec without concord intervention is not working as intended.

Incidentally, how'd you get the video from the bumper's perspective?

Falls under his description of harassment though:

"However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis."

Judging on a case to case basis is silly; better to adjust the mechanic so you can't completely disable someone in that manner.

The video is from an alt in corp to the freighter as far as I could tell. I would have webbed my freighter whilst trying to bump the machs

That makes a whole lot more sense, thanks.

I guess I overestimated GSF's infiltration into random ass corps

He hasn't made an effort to move to another location, and they weren't following him around, so no.

How is he being completely disabled? And no, all kind of harassment must be judged on a case-by-case basis. Not that bumping someone away from a gate qualifiesGǪ

Or you underestimated your own paranoia.

I think my explanation is likelier than yours

Falls under his description of harassment though:

"However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis."

Judging on a case to case basis is silly; better to adjust the mechanic so you can't completely disable someone in that manner. (or introduce consequences, w/e)

Falls under his description of harassment though:

"However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis."

Judging on a case to case basis is silly; better to adjust the mechanic so you can't completely disable someone in that manner. (or introduce consequences, w/e)

Unless the OP is bumped by the same people no matter where he/she goes despite being unprofitable... the OP has no case.

tl;dr... computers and coding are actually quite "stupid" and can't reason. You also can't create or alter a blanket mechanic that affects so many things in the game without creating numerous exceptions and/or creating new, unforeseen consequences that will also be abused.

freighter ganking is obviously fine

Yes yes, constantly trying to warp off and bringing a webber is intolerable idleness. Not going to bite any further, sorry.

I am remiss not to acknowledge that he had the option to eject or self-destruct, apologies.

Now you're just being silly; computers are quite smart, especially when analyzing something already broken down into 1's and 0's.

Of course ganking is fine; maybe you should be more coordinated and manage it without bumping.

Of course ganking is fine; maybe you should be more coordinated and manage it without bumping.

he had the option to wait out the aggression timer (without which this tactic doesn't work GÇö if he had none, he didn't even need that); he had an hour to it all in order, which means the gankers ****** up somehow, but that he ****** up even more in playing into their hands.

GǪin other words, they're pretty much useless for these kinds of judgement calls.

You seem confused.

Eve is a computer simulation mate.

GǪexcept that we're talking about GM evaluations of player actions and the intent behind those actions, not a computer simulation. So no, computers would be pretty much useless for these kinds of judgement calls.

Implying humans make consistent moral decisions? Incidentally, data mining would mimic human judgement with an extremely high degree of accuracy in a scenario like this. Computers are smart; people are bad at utilizing them.