| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Foxicity
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
91
   |
Posted - 2015.01.10 22:55:02 -
[61] - Quote
I don't know much about bumping, but is it fair to say that a well-managed freighter bumping can always keep a stationary freighter moving at least 1m/s?
If that's the case then the easier fix is to tell the pilots:
"Your ship is currently in motion and will have to come to a complete stop before warping to safety. Your ship may not warp immediately after you log off. Are you sure you want to quit game?"
And of course the corollary to this is that anyone who logs off has their ship's target speed turned down to 0m/s.
That would allow any ship to be held on-grid given you had enough pilots and the right ships to keep it moving. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
434
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 23:09:03 -
[62] - Quote
Foxicity wrote:I don't know much about bumping, but is it fair to say that a well-managed freighter bumping can always keep a stationary freighter moving at least 1m/s?
If that's the case then the easier fix is to tell the pilots:
"Your ship is currently in motion and will have to come to a complete stop before warping to safety. Your ship may not warp immediately after you log off. Are you sure you want to quit game?"
And of course the corollary to this is that anyone who logs off has their ship's target speed turned down to 0m/s.
That would allow any ship to be held on-grid given you had enough pilots and the right ships to keep it moving.
unfortunately the problem isn't the implementation but the idea |
Foxicity
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
91
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 23:28:56 -
[63] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:unfortunately the problem isn't the implementation but the idea
I disagree. Having to log back into the same spot is a considerable problem, but is limited by the ability of the bumper (or one of his friends) to remain online to catch your log-on. A freighter could easily log off, find out your time-zone from available offline information, and wait to log on until the hunter has gone to bed. Something could be put in place here to prevent time-zone warfare from interfering in the middle of a real-time engagement. In my opinion the POS shield reinforcement mechanic has a similar theme and its existence supports the idea that people shouldn't be able to log off and 'wait out' bumping until some ideal time given by intel. |
Paranoid Loyd
3480
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 23:58:07 -
[64] - Quote
I am baffled by this thread. Considering your antics lately, I would figure you would slink into obscurity so you can keep on keepin' on. Instead you decided to get on a soapbox. To each his own I guess.
This idea is no better than the victims calling for more buffs to ships and/or Concord. The tools are there, you obviously know how to use them quite effectively, why are you trying to make it easier? Watering down the game is never a good thing.
All of you counter points indicate that bumping should be considered aggression, I know you don't want that so maybe you should just stop.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!!!
|
Globby
frogdogs
Shut It Down
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 05:14:49 -
[65] - Quote
It's not about making it easier, it's about making it consistent with every other activity in the game.
No where else in eve can you stop someone from engaging you in pvp once you're already in pvp by logging off. |
Aran Hotchkiss
Phoibe Enterprises
52
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 07:17:04 -
[66] - Quote
What I'm surprised by, is given how often you see/read threads on here of people complaining about being suicide ganked or their mining barges blown up, they're met with scorn/derision/ a general offering of concrete and HTFU.
I'm guessing you misinterpreted the hostility towards gank targets as well... support for gankers and hence you'd get some progress on this thread, but all you've done is gotten yourself in the spotlight of the big ball of scorn/HTFU/hostility that this forum section feels on hi-sec ganks in general, weather you're the person pew-ing or getting pewed.
Good lord I'm turning into Iain.
Halp.
Plz.
:c
Quote:it's about making it consistent with every other activity in the game.
Ok, taking what you say is your argument and addressing it head on (doubt you'll feel as though I've addressed it but meh as in any debate that's up to the verdict of the adjudicators - which in this case would be everyone else, alternatively noone because 90% of people on this thread don't give a **** about this idea)
Ok, forming a list.
-Ok perhaps it is one of the few cases where logging off is a mechanic to avoid PvP. I'd doubt it's the sole activity though.
(......I'm so tempted to grab a Machariel and sit on a freighter gate to screw with people's heads now :D)
-However, this is also one of the few (maybe only) forms of PvP where your tackle (don't even try to justify bumping as anything other than tackling) ship does not gain any flags, is generally immune from counterattack from the freighter, and if your initial gank fails, you continue bumping the target until you can get a second, or third, or tenth wave of gank squads. In other PvP activites, if you tackle something and then fuckup and bite off more than you can chew, chances are you don't get a second chance to bring a bigger stick when you fleet turns to dust.
-This is the only form of PvP I can think of where you are unavoidably game-mechanics-bound to lose your ship in the attack, apart from ganking miners (which is pretty much the same thing) in other PvP the chance always exists your ship will survive. It might be astronomically low and effectively zero in some cases, but there's a distinction with buying a single lottery ticket, and not buying one at all (highly improbable, compared to impossible)
-Repeating my earlier post in this one but this form of PvP comes down to who has a better grip of the game's mechanics and who can navigate that field better than the other person in order to achieve their goal first. You have a type of battleship that's been fitted out what'd be considered god-awful in a normal environment to be able to fling itself at freighters to use the current bump mechanics to prevent it from ever warping. Then you have a fleet of -5.0 or lower pilots ready in gank catalysts sitting in station so despite the Faction Police mechanics designed to massively hinder criminal players from moving around hisec, the faction police may aswell not exist due to the measures you've taken. That's two examples of 'gaming the system' that I can think of. On the freighter pilot's side, when he jumps a gate and while holding cloak sees a potential bump Machariel sitting there,he's able to just close his client and have his freighter warp off, untouchable, and disappear. Another example of the system being gamed.
In conclusion, whilst it certainly is 'inconsistent' with other aspects of PvP ... literally every single aspect of freighter ganking is inconsistent with the rest of PvP, and whilst I so desperately want to sink back into the general rut of 'he plays the game differently to me therefore he's a whinging idiot blah blah" and accuse you of wanting your game even easier and dismissing you out of hand, in my current frame of mind I doubt you're able to effectively justify this change based on rectifying inconsistencies when suicide ganking is basically the exception to the rule.
Plus, there was also a suggestion very recently where you can right-click -> flag someone as a bumper and if they collide with you three more times they turn suspect, I see a lot of parallels in both the ideas, and the arguments for them.
One is right-click -> give them a combat log-off timer, the other is right-click -> flag as bumper, and potential for a suspect timer
One is based on the argument of how people being able to log off to avoid pvp is incositent with the rest of the game, the other is how people being able to perma-point freighters whilst being protected by CONCORD is inconsistent with the rest of the game.
The motion must fall.
Blerugh.
Shamelessly stole this line,
Alternatively, QFT
One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
The Kadeshi
1119
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 07:43:48 -
[67] - Quote
Globby wrote:No where else in eve can you stop someone from engaging you in pvp once you're already in pvp by logging off.
Falcon/Blackbird/Kitsune/Griffin ECM? Keres/Lachesis/Maulus Damps? Warp Core Stabbed FW Plex grinders? |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
669
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 09:29:34 -
[68] - Quote
Globby wrote:It's not about making it easier, it's about making it consistent with every other activity in the game.
No where else in eve can you stop someone from engaging you in pvp once you're already in pvp by logging off.
Talking about consistency is a bad idea when only in high sec can you block the players warp indefinately with absolutely zero repercussions.
Like I said before MAN UP AND FLAG UP. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |