Good thing that's not the case?

How much do you propose spending on a 200dps catalyst then?

Oh, I expected actual instances where the ruling was completely in the bumper's favor. That's usually what someone means when they say precedent.

they use a frig or destro to shoot you so you get an aggression counter which forbids you from logging off. Obviously broken mechanic, because freighters are unable to aggress anyone. I can see this stupid "tactic" causing many unsubs in the freighter community if CCP doesn't act.

Oh, I expected actual instances where the ruling was completely in the bumper's favor. That's usually what someone means when they say precedent.

If they never aggress you, does that mean you can escape persistent bumping by logging off at any time and logging back on?

If it requires that they sacrifice a ship every X minutes to keep the PvP flag on and thus prevent the random warp out on logoffski, then that's not really different from any other aggressive action that would lock you down like a scram or point.

Unfortunately, no. That's exactly the case.

I wouldn't build a 200dps catalyst to begin with since it would be too weak.

If it requires that they sacrifice a ship every X minutes to keep the PvP flag on and thus prevent the random warp out on logoffski, then that's not really different from any other aggressive action that would lock you down like a scram or point.

So as long as someone means well they can do whatever they want?

The required DPS for the OP's loss was well under 200.

A reasonable dev, even one that has designed bumping as an option, might find being bumped for an hour to be excessive or an exploit. Despite Tippia's dominance here, she does not actually speak for the devs. So it's worth a petition to find out.

Quite possibly, yes.

Uh-huh. 200k EHP delivered in ~15 seconds by 29 ships Gëá less than 200 DPS.

http://youtu.be/0MmIsrAQPM4

Being Bumped for an hour kinda kills a little bit of the like and excitement i have for this game,,,

Fisrt the 2 machariels bumped me for 10 minutes or so before goons ever showed up.

The major problem with that is, since he only has 15-16 minutes of video...

Oh that's not a problem. The video isn't admissible as evidence anyway.

Pretty much. You just have to wait a while for them to leave the spot where you'll reappear when you log back in. Ewarps are purposefully designed to allow pretty much zero input once they've been initiated. Every now and then, some tactic or technique arises that lets you manipulate where you end up, but they tend to get squished in short order.

Nope

Op took 60k in killmail; give me a pricetag pls.

Sure it is. The fact that you can't think of a scenario rather proves the inability to automate it in the fashion you're suggesting. How do you propose that the data mining should uncover hitherto unknown facts about the bumper and bumpee that makes it a clear case of non-harassment even though they've been running into each other constantly for months?

You mean the killmail that 1) only records raw HP, not EHP and 2) is notoriously inaccurate in measuring HP damage delivered?

An Obelisk has 200k EHP against blasters. The DPS required is in the region of 500, which means we're looking at T2 equipment, which means we end up in the 5GÇô10M region depending on how close you dare to cut it and how you boost the damage.

1M doesn't even buy you the hull.

From time to time, it's been possible to alter the landing spot by doing repeated login/disconnects, but they seem to have fixed that for now.

The same way a GM would

I can assure you that the person's thought process doesn't factor in.

60k doesn't conflict with the account at all.

200k/29/19

Sure it does: http://www.eve-central.com/home/quicklook.html?typeid=16240

So your data sifting tool includes an Eliza implementation now? InterestingGǪ

The thought process of all three parties factor in. I assure you right back.

GǪreferring to which part, exactly?

GǪor you can try not to alter the numbers. 200k / 29 / 15 = 460 + margin to make sure you get it done = 500.

GǪand minerals you mine yourself are free. Except, you know, not. So it's just over 1M.

I know CCP is pretty cool, but I don't think their GMs read minds.

The part where they made multiple suicide runs.

15s is a ballpark (you acknowledged as much)

You wouldn't have to do the manufacturing if you stopped bumping all the freighters; just saying.

Either way, someone screwed upGǪ multiple timesGǪ on that one, or it wouldn't have lasted for 60 minutes.

Oh, I expected actual instances where the ruling was completely in the bumper's favor. That's usually what someone means when they say precedent.

Incidentally, your quotes still don't mention ganking or holding someone for a prolonged period of time.

I said it must have been us fluffing it stop rubbing it in

So: how do you propose that the data mining should uncover hitherto unknown facts about the bumper and bumpee that makes it a clear case of non-harassment even though they've been running into each other constantly for months?

The part where they made multiple suicide runs.

It's a ballpark of the actual number (13 seconds) plus/minus a two second error margin from server tick timings. So: 15 seconds. Or even as low as 11.

GǪthat would give us 630 DPS by the way.

You are cluless about what the phrase signifies, just saying. So: a bit over 1M per hull minimum; closer to 1.4 if you buy in bulk.

The whole point of data mining is that it reveals trends and relations that aren't obvious to a silly fleshsack like myself. I can tell you from personal experience/literature that it's not hard to pull out 95%+ accuracy in similar applications.

54% reduction in EHP you mean

Your own blog(as well as other sources) says otherwise:

You evidently didn't get the joke.

Care to actually have a go at that (post 105) or are you going to keep claiming it's possible whilst ignoring clear stated evidence it's not?

You're still missing the point anyway - you're disagreeing with the rules as posted which doesn't mean any change in enforcing those rules would lead to any different outcomes, unless you change the rules.

I do think that this case shows that the mechanics have been stretch a little far beyond their intended limitations and that some tweaks would be to the benefit of the community as a whole.