EVE Search - Is "bumping" ships so they can't move an exploit?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is "bumping" ships so they can't move an exploit?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
T'rek	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:45:00 - [31] Edited by: T''rek on 31/12/2008 11:47:17 Edited by: T''rek on 31/12/2008 11:46:34 Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 31/12/2008 11:41:41 But T'rek to be more kind and un-charasteristic to this forum(), you said that an anti-bump module would be fine? How about a "temporal reflect field", that would increase the size of your "collision" field by, say, 200% or something? That could then be countered by fitting another ship with the same Win win no? I wouldn't use it and I don't fear that it would be used to the point where it'd cause stress. If it gets your rocks off, have at it. edit: It might have balancing issues, however. Take said situation: I'm in a vaga, and I'm webbed to ****, and I use this "bumping smartbomb" and everything around me gets blown > 10km away, I'm home free. Is that balanced? Or if it just inceases the collision field by 200%, wouldn't you just get bumped easier?
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:49:00 - [32] Edited by: Concorduck on 31/12/2008 11:49:56 Originally by: Heikki As most above, I seem to recall certain classes of bumping classed as exploits through petitions. Namely, trying to harass a non-war target in Empire, and request ransom to let the freighter move on. And how is that even remotely an exploit? Freighters can just logoffski multiple times and be 5m km away from the gate, since THAT isn't considered an exploit i sort of miss why should bumping that freighter and ask for ransom considered an exploit? EDIT: THEN WHO WAS PHONE! ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:52:00 - [33] Originally by: T'rek I wouldn't use it and I don't fear that it would be used to the point where it'd cause stress. If it gets your rocks off, have at it. edit: It might have balancing issues, however. Take said situation: I'm in a vaga, and I'm webbed to ***, and I use this "bumping smartbomb" and everything around me gets blown > 10km away, I'm home free. Is that balanced? Or if it just inceases the collision field by 200%, wouldn't you just get bumped easier? Fair point actually. It would need to generate a field that kept other ships away, insteaad of expanding the collision field. Also yes, i think it would have to be limited to say, shortest range of a frigate weapon? My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.*
T'rek	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:53:00 - [34] Originally by: Concorduck Edited by: Concorduck on 31/12/2008 11:49:56 Originally by: Heikki As most above, I seem to recall certain classes of bumping classed as exploits through petitions. Namely, trying to harass a non-war target in Empire, and request ransom to let the freighter move on. And how is that even remotely an exploit? Freighters can just logoffski multiple times and be 5m km away from the gate, since THAT isn't considered an exploit i sort of miss why should bumping that freighter and ask for ransom considered an exploit? EDIT: THEN WHO WAS PHONE! Tbh it was probably the mom on the phone, she said her dad was dead, but nothing about her mom.
Aneko	Posted - 2008.12.31 12:15:00 - [35] I don't see why bumping is an exploit/harassment unless you're attacking the person (it's lame to resort to such tactics in the first place as you obviously can't kill them without using bumping...fit more scramblers!). It's an unintended feature, but there's nothing that can be done about it as to have something changed requires a huge amount of players whinging about it, for example the WCS change, they now have -50% bonus to something or other.
Laechyd Eldgorn Caldari Art of War Exalted.	Posted - 2008.12.31 12:43:00 - [36] I think bumping ship (like freighter) in i.e. high sec where you have no hope to destroy the ship does fall in harassing category. However in combat it's many times only way to "tackle" a ship... unfortunately. It isn't very realistic but that's how it works for now. This kind of stuff is something exactly which should be uh... fixed somehow. We have tons of this kind of problems in eve which could use improvements. They feel minor problem if you've played for few months but after year or two those really start to annoy. Whole hi sec is kind of a problem itself. -.-
Jack Gilligan Dragon's Rage KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.31 13:17:00 - [37] I think the "bumping" mechanic as it is in the game is rather stupid. There needs to be an accounting for the relative MASS of the ships involved... To bump a battleship to the point you lose control of it should require a similar sized mass hitting it. A frigate hitting a MUCH larger ship at high speed should move the larger ship very little while sending the SMALL ship spinning off out of control... A small mass traveling at high speed isn't enough force to overcome the INTERTIA of a much larger mass... Right now the game pretty much treats all ship masses as equal and only differentiates by velocity, which makes no sense at all. --- My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 13:23:00 - [38] Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn I think bumping ship (like freighter) in i.e. high sec where you have no hope to destroy the ship does fall in harassing category. That is my understanding too. Bumping is an not allowed in situations were there is no realistic chance of killing the target ship. Bumping people just to annoy them in that situation is harassment. Having said that, I was told that by a GM over 4 years ago, so the policy could easily have changed since then. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 13:45:00 - [39] I fail to see where the "bumpage harassment" is. Seriously, how many times did you logoffski your freighter in a gatecamp? ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Rhatar Khurin Minmatar Free Ammatar Aid Organisation	Posted - 2008.12.31 14:08:00 - [40] They should remove normal bumping and replace it with an option on your HUD called "RAMMING SPEED!" You use it by targetting an opponent and it initiated combat (so can't be done in high sec normally) and it diverts all power from the weapons into the engines and flies towards the enemy ship and.. well.. who knows till you've done it!
Frug Repo Industries	Posted - 2008.12.31 14:14:00 - [41] Edited by: Frug on 31/12/2008 14:16:48 Originally by: Sheriff Jones Well i always found it to be an "exploit", in a sense that if you need it to do something, you should change your profession. You don't do a whole lot of PVP, do you jones? You wait on the other side of a gate for someone. They jump through. You tackle them and they start burning back to the gate. You put a web on them. They're still going too fast for you to kill in time. Do you: a) Sit there and go "well, I'd bump them, but then I should find a new profession. b) Bump them and kill them. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Kweel Nakashyn Minmatar Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.12.31 14:19:00 - [42] While I'm 100% with the bumping damage idea, Originally by: Sheriff Jones Only reason why people would be against bumping, is, as you said, if they can't adapt to it It would break blobs. CCP need to make a "formation" feature before or 0.0'll die. Fetchez la vache !
Rhaegor Stormborn R.U.S.T. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.31 14:28:00 - [43] CCP needs to work on the mechanics behind bumping and make it relate to a ship's mass.
Alz Shado Ever Flow Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:55:00 - [44] When one Minmatar ship collides with another, it's called "Bumping Uglies" True story. á ----------------------------------------- "Kill a man one is a murderer; kill a million, a conqueror; kill them all, a God." -- Jean Rostand
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.12.31 16:17:00 - [45] Make bumping a concordable act, remains a valid combat tactic, while hilarity ensues outside stations in highsec.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 16:22:00 - [46] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Make bumping a concordable act, remains a valid combat tactic, while hilarity ensues outside stations in highsec. Jita 4-4 OH, THE GLORY! ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Darklorden Blades Of EVE DENIED ACCESS	Posted - 2008.12.31 16:22:00 - [47] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn I think bumping ship (like freighter) in i.e. high sec where you have no hope to destroy the ship does fall in harassing category. That is my understanding too. Bumping is an not allowed in situations were there is no realistic chance of killing the target ship. Bumping people just to annoy them in that situation is harassment. Having said that, I was told that by a GM over 4 years ago, so the policy could easily have changed since then. ... and you're so right. Quote: 2008.12.22 22:27Bumping other players intentionally for an extended period is considered harassment. Please cease all such activity or face further repercussions. Best regards, GM Macayle EVE Online Customer Support - - - - - -= Hunger is the perfect motivator for those who are lazy by nature =- -= It is nice to be important, but it is more important to be nice =-
Zaerlorth Maelkor The Maverick Navy Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.31 16:39:00 - [48] Continually bumping someone is not an exploit if you do it for a specific purpose, like tackling someone until your friends arrive to blow him up. If you, however, do it for pure harassment then it's ban-able. ================================================== I should really get a sig.
Niskin Minmatar The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.	Posted - 2008.12.31 16:41:00 - [49] Originally by: Alz Shado When one Minmatar ship collides with another, it's called "Bumping Uglies" True story. Hah, nice! ------------- I am the n00b that time forgot.
Eliza Farcaster	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:02:00 - [50] Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor Continually bumping someone is not an exploit if you do it for a specific purpose, like tackling someone until your friends arrive to blow him up. If you, however, do it for pure harassment then it's ban-able. Would stopping them moving their ship not count as a specific purpose? I.e bumping a random guy in high sec to ransom him. Pay me a mill or you wont be warping for the next half hour.... Sounds like a broken game mechanic that desperately needs fixing.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:05:00 - [51] Originally by: Eliza Farcaster Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor Continually bumping someone is not an exploit if you do it for a specific purpose, like tackling someone until your friends arrive to blow him up. If you, however, do it for pure harassment then it's ban-able. Would stopping them moving their ship not count as a specific purpose? I.e bumping a random guy in high sec to ransom him. Pay me a mill or you wont be warping for the next half hour.... Sounds like a broken game mechanic that desperately needs fixing. Would clicking Ctrl-Q, Logging back in and logging out rapidly again not count as a specific countermeasure? I.e repeating the process different times to get your ship 3m km away from the bumper and laugh at him from your safespot... Sounds like a broken game mechanic that desperately needs fixing. ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Billy Sastard Amarr	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:06:00 - [52] Originally by: Eliza Farcaster ... bumping a random guy in high sec to ransom him. Pay me a mill or you wont be warping for the next half hour.... Sounds like a broken game mechanic that desperately needs fixing. Sounds like creative piracy to me, not broken at all <-------------------------------------------------> "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:07:00 - [53] Originally by: Zauberkraft This is just an honest question before I get flamed for being a whinner (obviously this involves a lost ship)... If you orbit someone at very very close range at a high speed in a small ship so that they can't turn and are effectively trapped in space is that an exploit and/or harresment? When this happened to me I thought it was just a neat trick some pirates were playing on me, but on mentioning it to fellow eve players they suggested it was an exploit or at least unintended. Sorry if this has been done to death, but I don't know what it's called and searching for "bumping" is a waste of time ;-) A goon once did this to me, so I got in touch with my ceo and he podded the bugger. The goon was ramming me with a pod and keeping me from warping my abaddon. I lost out on a Tempest kill because of the bastard, and I wasn't yet ready to take the sec hit (I was already -2 at the time). He mailed me after and said thanks. lol.
eXtas Atomic Battle Penguins	Posted - 2008.12.31 18:48:00 - [54] no its totaly ok to do... you can even grief neutral freighters and whatever in highec by bumping them for hours if that makes you feel good. I think it was griefing on the same lvl as canflaging ppl in noobsystems some time back but even if it was ccp changed the line and resent petitons show that you can do it all you want :P too bad 10km/s bs's been nerfed :P
Celestial Cookie	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:25:00 - [55] Originally by: Frug Edited by: Frug on 31/12/2008 14:16:48 Originally by: Sheriff Jones Well i always found it to be an "exploit", in a sense that if you need it to do something, you should change your profession. You don't do a whole lot of PVP, do you jones? You wait on the other side of a gate for someone. They jump through. You tackle them and they start burning back to the gate. You put a web on them. They're still going too fast for you to kill in time. Do you: a) Sit there and go "well, I'd bump them, but then I should find a new profession. b) Bump them and kill them. If you use the logic of "Well i'll have to use this unintended game feature or i'll lose out on a kill" then you'll apply other unintended features to things. Such as logging off to avoid that 0.0 gatecamp, everyone was on CCP's case to stop the logging off after someone jumped into a gatecamp. It wasn't meant to be that way, using unintended features to get a kill is as bad as someone logging off to save their ship, and how many people have been named and shamed for that?
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:34:00 - [56] Why not just make it so that warp drives don't use speed as a measure of when they activate? Give every ship a certain "warp drive calibration time", more or less equal to their current align time, make it so that once a ship starts initiating warp, the direction in which the ship is moving does not affect the warp time (though there'd need to be a sort of warp drive lock on for warpable objects to replace aligning). Problem solved. Bumping to keep people from warping off without actually initiating combat goes away, and bumping to get people off stations/gates etc. remains. It's a win/win.
Celestial Cookie	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:52:00 - [57] Originally by: Cambarus Why not just make it so that warp drives don't use speed as a measure of when they activate? Give every ship a certain "warp drive calibration time", more or less equal to their current align time, make it so that once a ship starts initiating warp, the direction in which the ship is moving does not affect the warp time (though there'd need to be a sort of warp drive lock on for warpable objects to replace aligning). Problem solved. Bumping to keep people from warping off without actually initiating combat goes away, and bumping to get people off stations/gates etc. remains. It's a win/win. That'd knock the whole 0.0 gang warp thing out of whack. The amount of people who complain about bumping are a tiny fraction compared to those who would be affected by the changes. Even if those who would be affected do use unintended game features to secure extra kills then whinge when people use unintended features to save their ships...pot...kettle. :(
Wolfae Minmatar	Posted - 2009.01.02 17:08:00 - [58] I don't suppose you could whack a tractor beam into reverse? That might fix the problem.
supr3m3justic3 Caldari Hakata Group Blade.	Posted - 2009.01.02 17:57:00 - [59] Originally by: Yon89 It is a feature until CCP calls it an exploit k. Yon /signed for truth ____
supr3m3justic3 Caldari Hakata Group Blade.	Posted - 2009.01.02 18:06:00 - [60] Originally by: Wolfae I don't suppose you could whack a tractor beam into reverse? That might fix the problem. Yea target someone and shoot a Tractor Beam at them in High sec. I'm sure that would work out real good for you. ____

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.