| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lan Wang
V I R I I
Ineluctable.
1773
   |
Posted - 2015.11.03 10:54:43 -
[31] - Quote
bye bye to bumping supers out of rep range from the rest of the fleet, i actually hope ccp dont rek this
Recruiting V I R I I Small Gang Nullsec PVP
Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic | Angel Cartel | Serpentis |
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
1801
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 11:52:46 -
[32] - Quote
My money is on a special Highsec solution or even Freighter specific. Because lets all be honest, this is not because there is an issue with bumping, this is because all the crying carebears who want to solo AFK freight their billions of assets without risk and effort in Highsec.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
1498
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 12:52:41 -
[33] - Quote
Tsk.
CCP already fixed this.
The Higgs-Boson Anchor rig, iirc.
Alas, freighters do not have a rig slot.
Bet that will probably change.
Also bet that if freighters do get a rig slot, that no freighter pilot anywhere will ever use it for a Higgs-Boson Anchor rig.
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
Leto Thule
Everywhere and Terrible
4083
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 12:54:05 -
[34] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:I told you so codies @leto they were talking about changes in the context of capitals (i.e. they are aware of all the wider game implications)
That's fine. Nail in the coffin for my subscription, so to speak. If what they do doesn't make sense, I'm out.
Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
131
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 13:12:30 -
[35] - Quote
Again, to all the crybabies, they were talking about changes to bumping in larger / capital context, and then Fozzie mentioned Freighters as well. So ye, I'm gonna guess that some changes will be coming, not specific to freighter bumping but to bumping in general, also impacting freighters. What kind of changes, when etc - no one knows for now, likely with the rest of cap changes (so spring next year).
It might be nothing, it might be everything, we just don't know. However, just seeing codies starting to whine already, when nothing is still known, brings joy to my heart. Sorry guys, but karma is a giant beach. |
Leto Thule
Everywhere and Terrible
4083
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 13:32:36 -
[36] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Again, to all the crybabies, they were talking about changes to bumping in larger / capital context, and then Fozzie mentioned Freighters as well. So ye, I'm gonna guess that some changes will be coming, not specific to freighter bumping but to bumping in general, also impacting freighters. What kind of changes, when etc - no one knows for now, likely with the rest of cap changes (so spring next year).
It might be nothing, it might be everything, we just don't know. However, just seeing codies starting to whine already, when nothing is still known, brings joy to my heart. Sorry guys, but karma is a giant beach.
Im not a "codie". Im not even a ganker, or "bumper".
In the past year or so, so many content nerfs have smacked this game in the face. The AWOX nerf, the cancerous LY changes to capitals (fatigue was needed, but the LY changes are terrible), the citadel stuff looks pretty bad IMHO -- yeah I know its not done... but "Asset relocation"? CTFO. Hyperdunking. Yet still some people cry for nerfs to highsec wardeccing. Others want nerfs to bumping... Seriously where does it come to the point that the game has nothing left for the bad guys to do? Do you play games on easy just to win? I ******* dont.
I play EVE because I want to have the dangerous aspects there. I dont want to print free ISK while AFK hauling or mining. I dont want my stuff to magically reappear if my alliance loses its Citadel. Loss matters. Or it did, anyhow. So yeah, last nail in the coffin. One day, not too far from now, everyone who called for all these nerfs and cried for joy at the end of the ebil piwates will merrily afk their way to riches, grow insanely bored from the fact that nobody can hurt you, and quit. Because thats not freakin FUN.
"We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard." - JFK
^ Applies.
Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
25603
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 14:07:19 -
[37] - Quote
Leto Thule wrote:Im not a "codie". Im not even a ganker, or "bumper". It may be a case of "you're either with us, or against us"
Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
Nil mortifi sine lucre.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1541
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 14:08:01 -
[38] - Quote
Saddly I applaud bumping mechanics being looked at. Between my love and understanding of physics and my overdeveloped sense of OCD... It's about time.
FOZZIE - removing the beach ball (mech)antics of capital bumping DOES NOT mean their alignment should suddenly tap into citaldel space magic (which will be moving eve one step closer to ruin) and poof they warp to freedom.
Capitals (Ferighters) being beachballed across new eden = wrong
Capitals (Freighters) being knocked out of alignment in the gravity free expanse of space = the way it should be!
(pro tip) A collision should do crazy spinny things to both ships involved. Crazy spinny recovery time should be dictated by ship characteristics. Mass/thrust ratio would be what i would use - I think that's already in game based on how ships handle under normal propulsion, using an AB and using a MWD.
DOWN with space magic and UP with (sort of) making physics work (at least kind of a little bit) in eve. |
Avvy
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
195
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 14:41:49 -
[39] - Quote
No bumping allowed, it scratches the paintwork. Do you pay for skins to get a scratch on them... No, think again. |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
1805
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:12:14 -
[40] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Saddly I applaud bumping mechanics being looked at. Between my love and understanding of physics and my overdeveloped sense of OCD... It's about time.
FOZZIE - removing the beach ball (mech)antics of capital bumping DOES NOT mean their alignment should suddenly tap into citaldel space magic (which will be moving eve one step closer to ruin) and poof they warp to freedom.
Capitals (Ferighters) being beachballed across new eden = wrong
Capitals (Freighters) being knocked out of alignment in the gravity free expanse of space = the way it should be!
(pro tip) A collision should do crazy spinny things to both ships involved. Crazy spinny recovery time should be dictated by ship characteristics. Mass/thrust ratio would be what i would use - I think that's already in game based on how ships handle under normal propulsion, using an AB and using a MWD.
DOWN with space magic and UP with (sort of) making physics work (at least kind of a little bit) in eve.
But the current mechanics are actually based on (underwater) physics. The trick is that the MWD increases the mass of the bumping ship.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:23:20 -
[41] - Quote
Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I
Ineluctable.
1777
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:30:30 -
[42] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D
what if the bumper has shields?
Recruiting V I R I I Small Gang Nullsec PVP
Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic | Angel Cartel | Serpentis |
|
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:34:48 -
[43] - Quote
Nvm that would pose a risk for the ganker which would be totally unacceptable to the crybabies here.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
1805
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:45:54 -
[44] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Nvm that would pose a risk for the ganker which would be totally unacceptable to the crybabies here. No, please, no damage! I beg you! You should work for CCP, you just completely wrecked bumping. I have no idea how we can recover from this. Will quit if implemented!
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I
Ineluctable.
1777
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 15:49:51 -
[45] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Nvm that would pose a risk for the ganker which would be totally unacceptable to the crybabies here.
oh look a merc who is just the same as a ganker but the difference is mercs pay to to shoot freighters, gankers dont.
Recruiting V I R I I Small Gang Nullsec PVP
Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic | Angel Cartel | Serpentis |
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
25606
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 16:17:33 -
[46] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Yes it should, I relish the thought of people using MWD frigates as 1500 tonne projectiles travelling at 2km+/s 
Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
Nil mortifi sine lucre.
|
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:43:37 -
[47] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Yes it should, I relish the thought of people using MWD frigates as 1500 tonne projectiles travelling at 2km+/s Be careful what you wish for.
Epic
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1541
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:46:12 -
[48] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D
Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD.
|
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:49:38 -
[49] - Quote
Naw a freighter can take lots of bumps. Damage for all involved or bust.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
BirdStrike
State War Academy
Caldari State
107
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:51:47 -
[50] - Quote
Bumping thread on bumping before bumping threads about bumping nerfs is nerfed. |
Austneal
Nero Fazione
End of Life
103
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:56:28 -
[51] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD.
"It's not the freighter's fault he got suicide ganked"
"It's not the miner's fault they got wardec'd"
That's not really a valid arguing point. If they apply damage mechanics to bumping, then both ships need to take damage. Not that I'm in favor of damage dealing bumps, but it would have to be applied equally. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1541
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 17:58:42 -
[52] - Quote
Austneal wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD. "It's not the freighter's fault he got suicide ganked" "It's not the miner's fault they got wardec'd" That's not really a valid arguing point. If they apply damage mechanics to bumping, then both ships need to take damage. Not that I'm in favor of damage dealing bumps, but it would have to be applied equally.
It should only apply to ships with an active prop mod. Anything other than that is unfair and unbalanced. |
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:08:05 -
[53] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Austneal wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD. "It's not the freighter's fault he got suicide ganked" "It's not the miner's fault they got wardec'd" That's not really a valid arguing point. If they apply damage mechanics to bumping, then both ships need to take damage. Not that I'm in favor of damage dealing bumps, but it would have to be applied equally. It should only apply to ships with an active prop mod. Anything other than that is unfair and unbalanced.
Crash into a parked car doing 90 mph then come back and suggest that.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1541
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:25:38 -
[54] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Austneal wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Samwise Everquest wrote:Bumping should cause damage to both ships involved :D Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD. "It's not the freighter's fault he got suicide ganked" "It's not the miner's fault they got wardec'd" That's not really a valid arguing point. If they apply damage mechanics to bumping, then both ships need to take damage. Not that I'm in favor of damage dealing bumps, but it would have to be applied equally. It should only apply to ships with an active prop mod. Anything other than that is unfair and unbalanced. Crash into a parked car doing 90 mph then come back and suggest that.
Put my Ferrari in game and what you're saying will start to make sense to me. (please don't pump me full of anti matter in the wallmart parking lot for saying that) |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
9026
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:34:09 -
[55] - Quote
Epic
[b]----
CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off.[/b]
|
Samwise Everquest
Because ISK
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:39:28 -
[56] - Quote
Just waiting for my locator agents to get back to me.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3688
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:46:36 -
[57] - Quote
Siegfried Cohenberg wrote:CCP will never remove freighter bumping from the game. There needs to be a certain level of risk when flying a freighter.
There is. You are spending $15 a month to watch planets go past your ship, very, very slowly.
One thing to consider: How would bumping be changed? What I like: If you initiate warp, after some longish time, you will always warp, irrelevant of your velocity. Say, after two minutes.
With this change, a ship on autopilot, heading for the gate, is still just as vulnerable as now. Also, a ship being piloted can still be delayed from entering warp, giving time for proper tackle to arrive. But endlessly bumping a ship, with little recourse for the pilot, goes away.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3688
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:50:12 -
[58] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD.
So you are saying I can park my ship at the Jita undock, and every ship that runs into me takes damage?
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Lady Ayeipsia
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
970
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:51:16 -
[59] - Quote
Bumping has been in the game since when? Most likely the inception of the game mechanics. Did it come later? Eh, even if it did am I the only one happy that CCP is doing a code review of the really old stuff? That has to be a good sign and may help with a good many things. How much of lag in a heavily TiDi fight is caused by checks on bumping mechanics? I'm not saying I support removal of bumping, but I do support CCP revising old code to improve all aspects of this game. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1541
|
Posted - 2015.11.03 18:56:32 -
[60] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Bumping should only cause damage to the buming ship. NOT the ship being bumped. It's not the freighters fault he got bumped, so he shouldn't take damage. It's not fair to be able to damage a ship and circumvent destruction at the hands of CONCORD.
So you are saying I can park my ship at the Jita undock, and every ship that runs into me takes damage?
No, I'm saying it's the end of the work day, I'm bored so I started trolling. I appologize. Please contact Leto for verification of my slow work day trolling. I've tried to stop on several occaisions, but I just can't.
I really don't care who does what to freighters.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |