EVE Search - Countering Bumping ganks in highsec

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Countering Bumping ganks in highsec

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 1596	Posted - 2015.11.18 12:56:45 - [361] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I mean, seriously, that is the single stupidest thing I have ever read on these forums, and that includes the tripe that Infinity Ziona or Dinsdale used to post. "Gankers should not be able to just log in and kill somebody, but freighters totally have the right to be afk without consequence." Nevermind that the heavy handed criminal flag penalties are exactly why gankers behave like that. Nope, it can't possibly be yet another repercussion of the overbearing nerfs to real gameplay, we must just need to dramatically buff the safety of afk people in highsec yet again. I honestly can't believe you actually copped to that level of hypocrisy. Nothing you say will ever be taken seriously again, although it's not like you had much credibility to begin with. So to be clear cupcake - I said gankers shouldn't be allowed to play by ping. I never said freighters should be allowed to auto pilot or be AFK. You added that because I'm right, you're paniced that I'm right and your only vialble means to argue is to 'add in' things I didn't say and argue the points you added in. All the while calling me pathetic (If only I could think of a word to describe what you are doing.... hmm...) What you quoted me as saying: "Gankers should not be able to just log in and kill somebody, but freighters totally have the right to be afk without consequence." The second half of your qhote is not anywhere in what I said. (That Billy Idol song 'Dancing with myself' kind of embodies your fantasy argument)
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15092	Posted - 2015.11.18 12:58:03 - [362] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I never said freighters should be allowed to auto pilot or be AFK. Yes, you did, and have done so repeatedly. You're literally here arguing for the imaginary right of people to play the game wrong. It's pretty much all you ever post. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Lan Wang Knights of the Posing Meat FETID 1850	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:00:04 - [363] - Quote why shouldnt gankers be allowed to do ping play? Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|
admiral root Red Galaxy 3560	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:02:34 - [364] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: why shouldnt gankers be allowed to do ping play? Because. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Hiasa Kite Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 331	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:10:21 - [365] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: You are correct, I don't want you to have a reason to log in and gank someone. I want the game to support you being logged in on your ganking character and being engaged in ganking (the waiting part until a viable target is located). I don't want you ratting guristas for 3 hours and then logging ratter pilot off, logging ganker pilot on while another character in a mach 'holds' the freighter until your crew is assembled. This is quite funny. On one hand we have people arguing that the punishment for ganking is non-exiatent or not harsh enough. On the other, we have dear Ms. Lost here arguing that gankers aren't doing things aside from being logged off while waiting for a gank target. Criminal pilots are chased by faction police (FacPo) each time they land on grid (30 seconds after landing). FacPo are much weaker than CONCORD, they can be tanked and even killed, though not by your standard ganakalyst. Even if you can tank them, they're a significant disadvantage for the criminal. The result is that the pilot literally cannot perform any task while waiting for his next target. I'm not so sure about you, but being forced to sit logged in doing precisely nothing isn't compelling game play. The gankers are simply making the best use of their time as a result of the overzealous crime watch penalties. <^.^> I'm a cat lol
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 1596	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:14:30 - [366] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: I never said freighters should be allowed to auto pilot or be AFK. Yes, you did, and have done so repeatedly. You're literally here arguing for the imaginary right of people to play the game wrong. It's pretty much all you ever post. Please show me an accurate post where I claimed a freighter should be allowed to auto pilot or play afk. (key word is accurate - don't add in what you feel I'm saying - you've proven you are not good at that) It's simply not true. I've never claimed to be a prolific ganker (another fantasy you're trying to create). We were interested in it. As a small group (not being able to field enough cats to gank a freighter) we chose to gank mission cream puffs. We did it for roughly 3 weeks. We made several billion isk and our method did not involve holding the target via bumping - we were all online, active and at the ready. It normally took several hours of waiting until we go the right target in the right situation to pull the trigger. All in all, we made several billion, but once we solved the math equation (cost and number of BC vs. value of loot dropped) it became too easy to hold our interest. We occaisionally (once per year or so) take a vacation to Apanake and nab a few marauders under the guise of 'teambuilding' but tbh it's mostly just to shake things up a bit. Really good at marauder ganking - yes Prolific - no (it's kind of boring in our view) AFK and pinged to gank - no (which probably is what makes it boring) I don't like afk as much as the next guy. You're barking up the wrong tree there. I'm not dealing in imaginary claims (like you) or imaginary rights that eve players have. I'm just giving honest opinions. Your opinions are also welcome. What isn't welcome is when you 'add lib' and then argue with yourself. Feel free to argue with what I say, but please please, don't make poop up.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15092	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:20:29 - [367] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Please show me an accurate post where I claimed a freighter should be allowed to auto pilot or play afk. Heck, just go through this thread. Whether you want to admit it or not, asking for ganking to be nerfed in any way buffs afk hauling and mining. Which is what you want, you just won't admit it without slipping up like you did on the previous page. Your smokescreen isn't fooling anyone, hence why you're in full blown defensive mode. Quote: I don't like afk as much as the next guy. Once again, you lie. You are, and have been repeatedly in the past, arguing to massively buff afk gameplay in highsec. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 244	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:25:21 - [368] - Quote Hiasa Kite wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: You are correct, I don't want you to have a reason to log in and gank someone. I want the game to support you being logged in on your ganking character and being engaged in ganking (the waiting part until a viable target is located). I don't want you ratting guristas for 3 hours and then logging ratter pilot off, logging ganker pilot on while another character in a mach 'holds' the freighter until your crew is assembled. This is quite funny. On one hand we have people arguing that the punishment for ganking is non-exiatent or not harsh enough. On the other, we have dear Ms. Lost here arguing that gankers aren't doing things aside from being logged off while waiting for a gank target. Criminal pilots are chased by faction police (FacPo) each time they land on grid (30 seconds after landing). FacPo are much weaker than CONCORD, they can be tanked and even killed, though not by your standard ganakalyst. Even if you can tank them, they're a significant disadvantage for the criminal. The result is that the pilot literally cannot perform any task while waiting for his next target. I'm not so sure about you, but being forced to sit logged in doing precisely nothing isn't compelling game play. The gankers are simply making the best use of their time as a result of the overzealous crime watch penalties. i suggust you look into the facpo and how they work. Its not hard to bait them off and tank them somewhere else in system leaving others to operate without any issues.
Hiasa Kite Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 332	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:35:48 - [369] - Quote Lady Rift wrote: Hiasa Kite wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: You are correct, I don't want you to have a reason to log in and gank someone. I want the game to support you being logged in on your ganking character and being engaged in ganking (the waiting part until a viable target is located). I don't want you ratting guristas for 3 hours and then logging ratter pilot off, logging ganker pilot on while another character in a mach 'holds' the freighter until your crew is assembled. This is quite funny. On one hand we have people arguing that the punishment for ganking is non-exiatent or not harsh enough. On the other, we have dear Ms. Lost here arguing that gankers aren't doing things aside from being logged off while waiting for a gank target. Criminal pilots are chased by faction police (FacPo) each time they land on grid (30 seconds after landing). FacPo are much weaker than CONCORD, they can be tanked and even killed, though not by your standard ganakalyst. Even if you can tank them, they're a significant disadvantage for the criminal. The result is that the pilot literally cannot perform any task while waiting for his next target. I'm not so sure about you, but being forced to sit logged in doing precisely nothing isn't compelling game play. The gankers are simply making the best use of their time as a result of the overzealous crime watch penalties. i suggust you look into the facpo and how they work. Its not hard to bait them off and tank them somewhere else in system leaving others to operate without any issues. Leaving those who undertake the task at risk and necessitating an even larger group of people for the purposes of freighter ganking. Why do this when a smaller fleet can simply remain docked and do whatever they want while they wait? Like I said, it's the most efficient use of their time. <^.^> I'm a cat lol
Lan Wang Knights of the Posing Meat FETID 1852	Posted - 2015.11.18 13:38:19 - [370] - Quote ping play is pretty much the same as sitting on a titan waiting for the cyno bait to light a cyno Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|

Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15093	Posted - 2015.11.18 14:11:39 - [371] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: ping play is pretty much the same as sitting on a titan waiting for the cyno bait to light a cyno "ping play" is what you get when you have anti fun "time out" mechanics, as EVE has so many of. Since this isn't a sporting event and there's no trophy on the line, people are bound to try and find ways to have fun in spite of anti fun mechanics. When they slapped us with jump fatigue, people turned to wormholes. And then, just like with highsec, CCP finds themselves once again nerfing fun wherever it's found, in service to some grand concept vision in which they know better than us what fun is. Although the vision is more than likely the excuse given for changes made due to tears. There's absolutely nothing wrong with marginalizing mechanics that are not fun. It is not only to be expected, but celebrated, and mechanics that players are consistently having to work around should be suspended and re-evaluated. That's what most people call holistic game design. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 642	Posted - 2015.11.18 14:18:52 - [372] - Quote Hiasa Kite wrote: Correct. However, bumping does not prevent alignment, it prevents alignment with a specific coordinate. This is an important distinction you're missing. Then you sir are a complete fail at bumping and you should go stand in the corner and hang your head in shame. Hiasa Kite wrote: Speed and vector are two different things. You very much have the requisite speed for warp while bumped, just not the vector. That is unless the bumper happens to bump you toward a warpable object such as a celestial, bookmark or fleetmate. It is extremely easy too figure out how to bump someone in a way that reduces their "speed" in the direction they were trying to warp WITHOUT imparting speed along any other "vector". If you do not or cannot understand such a simple principal of how physics is applied in this game then you are hardly qualified to make comment on this specific aspect of bumping. Marbles on a smooth, flat, level surface are an excellent tool for the exploration of and gaining a basic understanding of this skill that you obviously lack.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 1596	Posted - 2015.11.18 14:39:23 - [373] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Please show me an accurate post where I claimed a freighter should be allowed to auto pilot or play afk. Heck, just go through this thread. Whether you want to admit it or not, asking for ganking to be nerfed in any way buffs afk hauling and mining. Which is what you want, you just won't admit it without slipping up like you did on the previous page. Your smokescreen isn't fooling anyone, hence why you're in full blown defensive mode. Quote: I don't like afk as much as the next guy. Once again, you lie. You are, and have been repeatedly in the past, arguing to massively buff afk gameplay in highsec. I'm asking for proof of what you say, not generalized summaries of your interpretations. Your just spouting what you want me to be saying (you know - silly stuff that you can argue with), you're not actually quoting me. Do it right or don't do it at all - You can have imaginary arguments w/out pooping up this thread.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15095	Posted - 2015.11.18 15:44:15 - [374] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Do it right or don't do it at all If only you could manage to apply this rationale to freighter pilots. But alas, gotta defend that narrative to be afk. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16978	Posted - 2015.11.18 15:49:51 - [375] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: to get it away from the gate so it cant crash it? get it out of range of sentry guns? sorta like a murderer dragging a victim up a dark alley A rather apt way of putting it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Mike Voidstar Voidstar Free Flight Foundation 1035	Posted - 2015.11.18 16:51:59 - [376] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Please show me an accurate post where I claimed a freighter should be allowed to auto pilot or play afk. Heck, just go through this thread. Whether you want to admit it or not, asking for ganking to be nerfed in any way buffs afk hauling and mining. Which is what you want, you just won't admit it without slipping up like you did on the previous page. Your smokescreen isn't fooling anyone, hence why you're in full blown defensive mode. Quote: I don't like afk as much as the next guy. Once again, you lie. You are, and have been repeatedly in the past, arguing to massively buff afk gameplay in highsec. I'm asking for proof of what you say, not generalized summaries of your interpretations. Your just spouting what you want me to be saying (you know - silly stuff that you can argue with), you're not actually quoting me. Do it right or don't do it at all - You can have imaginary arguments w/out pooping up this thread. Hiding all of Karrous's posts improves your forum experience at least 300%.
Lan Wang Knights of the Posing Meat FETID 1857	Posted - 2015.11.18 16:55:19 - [377] - Quote he actually talks sense so your only hiding from the truth Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|
Mike Voidstar Voidstar Free Flight Foundation 1035	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:02:26 - [378] - Quote Oh...yeah. That must be it. He's got some kind of mass production facility for strawmen, spouts drivel like it was reality affirming truth, and if his actual personality is anything like what he puts out on here it's no wonder he can't infiltrate red frog, he would trigger a great many practicing sadists I know into ejecting him from their ranks. But no, it must be all that true talk that I am ignoring. Or maybe it's because he isn't actually joining conversations. Right around the time he admits that there is nothing that can be said to make him treat anything you say as being honest is when you should realize his only goal is to spew troll vomit on everything within a mile of him.
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3694	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:19:50 - [379] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Mike Voidstar wrote: Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that Now that is, IMO, a lie. How? It does not stop it. It's a very mild repercussion that almost none would take advantage of. The people ganking always like to scream "but the non-consensual PvP must flow!"... It just allows more PvP. Surely that's not so much risk it would deter a gank? Simple really, you have already noted it would impose additional costs. Raising costs is basically a nerf. We can think of it as like a new tax or a regulation. Now you must fit a module which in turn will activate a timer when activated letting others freely shoot you. That is very much a nerf. And no, it is not that the non-consensual PvP must flow, but that there should not be arbitrary restrictions on non-consensual PvP in a sandbox game. If the outcome is that we all sit around singing kumbaya my lord while holding handsGÇªfine, but if the outcome also contains non-consensual PvPGÇªthen fine. Further it is coming pretty close to a lie to state it GÇ£allowsGÇ¥ more PvP. Nothing is stopping your from imposing PvP on the bumping ship other than your own preferences not to suffer the penalties for doing so. You should not get a free pass on that point, IMO, simply because you are somehow better or special compared to those who do not share your view of the game. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3694	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:22:34 - [380] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Mike Voidstar wrote: Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that Yet there is zero reason why you should need an invitation to gank someone bumping a freighter. I've already demonstrated how little doing so impacts sec status, and others have shown that the isk cost of the ships to gank the bumper are also negligible. You only need to step outside your self perceived delusion that ganking makes you a bad person to realize that you don't need further mechanics that will ultimately only serve to make bad game play safer. Regardless of how minor the penalty, self defense from unprovoked aggression should not result in penalties. To add to the chorus, you have other options than shooting the bumper. Look, it is super simple, if you wait until you are being bumped you have done things very, very wrong. Let me return to one of my preferred ways of stating things, probabilistically. P(Ganked\|Being Bumped) >> P(Ganked\|Not Being Bumped). That is if you are being bumped your probability of being ganked is much, much higher than if you are not being bumped. So donGÇÖt get bumped. Problem solved. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?

Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3694	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:24:45 - [381] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Mike Voidstar wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Mike Voidstar wrote: Granting a criminal flags isn't a nerf for taking part in a gank. It's an invitation to even more PvP. You should embrace that Yet there is zero reason why you should need an invitation to gank someone bumping a freighter. I've already demonstrated how little doing so impacts sec status, and others have shown that the isk cost of the ships to gank the bumper are also negligible. You only need to step outside your self perceived delusion that ganking makes you a bad person to realize that you don't need further mechanics that will ultimately only serve to make bad game play safer. Regardless of how minor the penalty, self defense from unprovoked aggression should not result in penalties. But it is not self defense. Ganking the bumping ship is the last resort after you've done absolutely everything else wrong, not the first option you take. Regardless if they play your way or not, they are still trying to escape unprovoked aggression. That should never result in penalties, an aggressor never protected by Concord. It is not aggression in the game. You keep claiming it is, but now I have to go with Kaarous, you are at this point simply lying. Since it is not aggression, having to gank the bumper due to one's incompetence should come with a penalty...after all you were incompetent. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3694	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:29:24 - [382] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Dear me. Zinger again. Or you should go read. Either way, well done. Mike, I have already laid out how you are being...well...a liar here. In game bumping is not aggression in the sense of getting a timer. That is true. You keep trying to equivocate by using the plain English definition of aggression and then say it should not elicit a response from Concord. That's fine, but what you are really saying is that bumping should be consider an act of aggression in the game. The problem is you want to remove bumping entirely except from fitting a module that will result in a timer allowing for the person activating the module to be attacked by anyone passing by. That is quite clearly a nerf to ganking. Then you blatantly lie that it is not a nerf. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Ima Wreckyou The Conference Elite CODE. 1891	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:37:05 - [383] - Quote Old: 1) Carebears cry for better CONCORD protection 2) CCP buffs CONCORD 3) Carebears cry because other people who actually play the game got better CONCORD protection as well and use it against them New: 1) Carebears cry that bumping should get you flagged somehow so brave carebears can defend themselfs 2) CCP implements some kind of new mechanic to stop the whining 3) Carebears cry because other people who actually play the game use the mechanic in some way they did not intended and carebears keep dying left and right. Maybe we should just stop trying to prevent them from implementing horrible ideas, I am sure it will be fun. the Code ALWAYS wins Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
Iain Cariaba 1977	Posted - 2015.11.18 17:45:07 - [384] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: Regardless if they play your way or not, they are still trying to escape unprovoked aggression. That should never result in penalties, an aggressor never protected by Concord. Let me put this another way, since you obviously can't grasp the concepts unless they're spelled out. I occasionally blitz missions in a machariel. Sometimes I bump freighters on gates while moving around in said machariel. I mostly do this for the giggles of seeing a massive freighter bounce off me at ludicrous speeds. Now, if freighter pilot is either afk, or a whiney little *** in local, I may hang around and bump them some more. I'm not calling for a gank squad to log in, I'm just being a . I do the same thing to miners. Bumping may occasiinally be a ** move, but it is not aggression. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Zimmer Jones Aliastra Gallente Federation 353	Posted - 2015.11.18 18:27:04 - [385] - Quote Yeah, its definitely not agression, but maybe in the age of Space Justice Warriors we can call it microagression. so it would take 1000 bumps to make a milliagression, and a thousand more of those to make a full agression timer. 1,000,000 bumps = 20 minute timer. I'm sure that would be acceptable. Really I there should be weapon mod replacement with sandwich boards and signs on 2x4"s for proclaiming injustice . and others with signs saying "its not so bad," "citation needed," and various quotes from the holy books of CODE, Pastafarians etc. Put all the nuts in the same bag. Give them the right to be obviously self interested spoons, just like everyone else that have had the playing field leveled and now want the pitch raised on their sides with no switching at halftime. Being disturbing is better than being boring.
Vic Jefferson Stimulus Rote Kapelle 702	Posted - 2015.11.18 18:42:12 - [386] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Even if you did, these citadels are tailor made ganking platforms which will be a boon to gankers come spring. Hrm. I'm actually curious on the details here. How are these going to be any better than NPC stations, which as far as I can see are basically a combination forward base and catalyst dispenser? What could be better than an unassailable place to hang out and reship indefinitely? Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3694	Posted - 2015.11.18 19:10:12 - [387] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I mean, seriously, that is the single stupidest thing I have ever read on these forums, and that includes the tripe that Infinity Ziona or Dinsdale used to post. That is a high bar...errr low bar....whatever. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2037	Posted - 2015.11.18 19:10:35 - [388] - Quote Vic Jefferson wrote: Black Pedro wrote: Even if you did, these citadels are tailor made ganking platforms which will be a boon to gankers come spring. Hrm. I'm actually curious on the details here. How are these going to be any better than NPC stations, which as far as I can see are basically a combination forward base and catalyst dispenser? What could be better than an unassailable place to hang out and reship indefinitely? place a citadel a few grids behind the gate with the undock aligned to the gate @ChainsawPlankto
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1993	Posted - 2015.11.18 19:17:28 - [389] - Quote Vic Jefferson wrote: Black Pedro wrote: Even if you did, these citadels are tailor made ganking platforms which will be a boon to gankers come spring. Hrm. I'm actually curious on the details here. How are these going to be any better than NPC stations, which as far as I can see are basically a combination forward base and catalyst dispenser? What could be better than an unassailable place to hang out and reship indefinitely? One that you can put in any system that you want to gank out of or visit regularly. You can eliminate the only real window of vulnerability which is taking a gate by having your gankships fit and ready to go, and you can do so in stationless systems. Just take the gates in a pod reshipping to a cat in a friendly citadel (you don't even have to own it) and head straight to the target protected by tethering on the undock with literally 0% risk to your ship until you are on grid with the target. For fleet ganking, you can also just put one next to each gate and you can avoid warping the fleet around - just undock and a short warp to the bumper with no vulnerability. And with the 24h warning, you can take down these unrigged citadels if you catch a wardec, again with 0% risk to your assets, but the ability for non-corp members to dock in them means that you can hide behind endless alt corps with different vulnerability windows to keep them hard or impossible to get rid of. Perhaps all-in-all not an actual buff to ganking, but certainly they will assist with logistics and provide more safety for organized gankers than stations alone, especially in stationless systems.
Hiasa Kite Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 335	Posted - 2015.11.18 19:19:21 - [390] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: It is extremely easy too figure out how to bump someone in a way that reduces their "speed" in the direction they were trying to warp WITHOUT imparting speed along any other "vector". Hang on. Let me wrap my head around this. On one hand you've got a freighter with a ~70m/s entry warp speed. On the other, you've got a Machariel with a ~2000m/s max speed and a 7-8sec align time. You're trying to tell me that at no point during bump tackle, the freighter is never allowed to move faster than the requisite ~70m/s. As in, the Mach bumps the freighter, slows, re-manouvres, overtakes the freighter and re-bumps in such a way the freighter can never possibly enter warp on any vector? All of this while successfully nudging the freighter away from the gate some 400-500km to not only evade sentry guns but to also bump off grid so third parties are less likely to spot what's going on and interfere. I've got to be honest, I knew there was some degree of skill involved when it came to bumping but that, right there is pretty gosh darn impressive! Like, mind-blowing impressive. <^.^> I'm a cat lol



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.