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)
Zauberkraft	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:11:00 - [1] 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 ;-)
Lui Kai Better Than You	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:13:00 - [2] It is called bumping, yes. It is not an exploit. Once upon a time, it was the only way to "tackle" a supercap. ----------------
PsychoBones Project Nemesis	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:15:00 - [3] I believe if you're doing it just to be a jackass (example: bumping a random freighter that is trying to warp) it's punishable. However, it's legitimate as a combat tactic.
HankMurphy Minmatar Pelennor Enterprises	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:16:00 - [4] i think the bumping mechanic can best be described as "working as unintended" ---------- Seasons Greetings and have a Happy Alvis Time
Zeba Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:17:00 - [5] What PsychoBones said. inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:28:00 - [6] 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. If we had ACTUAL collision models on ships and a tool to avoid this "bump", like "anti-tractor beam" or some such, then it would be a tactic. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Commander Aeris Caldari	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:30:00 - [7] or both ships take equal damage after a "bump" bye bye bumping frig
Zauberkraft	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:31:00 - [8] Originally by: PsychoBones I believe if you're doing it just to be a jackass (example: bumping a random freighter that is trying to warp) it's punishable. Well funnily enough that is exactly what happened to me, only it was in a combat situation, and they prevented me warping out till downtime and then EVE decided my ship was destroyed in downtime (well the logs say 11:00 but my ship was still fine at 11:00 as the message "cluster shutdown imminent" was shown on my machine). So I guess I feel more hard done by that my ship was destroyed when I wasn't even there to do anything about it, but hemming in a transport by bumping seems pretty lame. Anyways, that's another matter CCP won't refund the ship because of the downtime "issue". But I guess this has taught me something - I better learn how to bump people and spread the joy.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:32:00 - [9] Originally by: Commander Aeris or both ships take equal damage after a "bump" bye bye bumping frig Aye. Sadly it would be very exploitable if there was no "bump module". Which i've advocated for a LOOONG time. Activate module. You take damage but can bump ships(otherwise your ship would take "evasive actions". Bigger the bump, bigger the damage. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Commander Aeris Caldari	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:33:00 - [10] Edited by: Commander Aeris on 31/12/2008 10:34:01 Originally by: Zauberkraft Well funnily enough that is exactly what happened to me, only it was in a combat situation, and they prevented me warping out till downtime and then EVE decided my ship was destroyed in downtime (well the logs say 11:00 but my ship was still fine at 11:00 as the message "cluster shutdown imminent" was shown on my machine). So I guess I feel more hard done by that my ship was destroyed when I wasn't even there to do anything about it, but hemming in a transport by bumping seems pretty lame. Anyways, that's another matter CCP won't refund the ship because of the downtime "issue". But I guess this has taught me something - I better learn how to bump people and spread the joy. you do know that you can just bump them back just as hard right?...just double-click and change course will knock them the **** out
Darklorden Blades Of EVE DENIED ACCESS	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:34:00 - [11] If in combat then its a viable tactic, but if you're just bumping or being bumped as a mean to harass then it can be reported and a GM will warn you. - - - - - -= 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 =-
Yon89 Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:35:00 - [12] It is a feature until CCP calls it an exploit k. Yon ============= SIG SIG SIG
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:36:00 - [13] Originally by: Darklorden If in combat then its a viable tactic, but if you're just bumping or being bumped as a mean to harass then it can be reported and a GM will warn you. Which is why it doesn't work. Why would the "cold hard world of EVE" care if someone is harassing you IF you're not fighting? It shouldn't. Hensh, bumpmodule, or a "collision avoiding system ejector", which if turned on outside combat, would cause in the same reprocautions then shooting someone. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Zauberkraft	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:40:00 - [14] Originally by: Commander Aeris Edited by: Commander Aeris on 31/12/2008 10:34:01 you do know that you can just bump them back just as hard right?...just double-click and change course will knock them the **** out Nope had no idea, I better practice with a mate.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 10:46:00 - [15] Originally by: Darklorden If in combat then its a viable tactic, but if you're just bumping or being bumped as a mean to harass then it can be reported and a GM will warn you. Yeah, like that's gonna happen ----------------------------------------- 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 10:57:00 - [16] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Which is why it doesn't work. Why would the "cold hard world of EVE" care if someone is harassing you IF you're not fighting? It shouldn't. Hensh, bumpmodule, or a "collision avoiding system ejector", which if turned on outside combat, would cause in the same reprocautions then shooting someone. If we had a true "cold hard world of EVE" there wouldn't be any Concord or high or low sec space, just lawless space everywhere. Since this game needs a steady income to stay alive there has to be some rules, otherwise only the hardcore players would still remain after the gankatons had passed by. A friend of mine got warned after being petitioned for a few "harmless" bumps. - - - - - -= 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 =-
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:01:00 - [17] Originally by: Darklorden If we had a true "cold hard world of EVE" there wouldn't be any Concord or high or low sec space, just lawless space everywhere. Since this game needs a steady income to stay alive there has to be some rules, otherwise only the hardcore players would still remain after the gankatons had passed by. A friend of mine got warned after being petitioned for a few "harmless" bumps. Not the point really. shooting ships in lowsec/0.0 has rules. Bumping ships should have same rules. If anyone can give a good reason why a bumping module wouldn't improve the game tactics, and game lore in itself, i'm open to hear them My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Kainoss Gallente Phantom Squad	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:10:00 - [18] Originally by: PsychoBones I believe if you're doing it just to be a jackass (example: bumping a random freighter that is trying to warp) it's punishable. However, it's legitimate as a combat tactic. No it is never an exploit as I found out from a petition. Perfectly legal tactic under any situation. ------------
T'rek	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:27:00 - [19] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Darklorden If we had a true "cold hard world of EVE" there wouldn't be any Concord or high or low sec space, just lawless space everywhere. Since this game needs a steady income to stay alive there has to be some rules, otherwise only the hardcore players would still remain after the gankatons had passed by. A friend of mine got warned after being petitioned for a few "harmless" bumps. Not the point really. shooting ships in lowsec/0.0 has rules. Bumping ships should have same rules. If anyone can give a good reason why a bumping module wouldn't improve the game tactics, and game lore in itself, i'm open to hear them Because you're a whining carebear who needs to adapt or die.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:29:00 - [20] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 31/12/2008 11:29:30 Originally by: T'rek Originally by: Sheriff Jones If anyone can give a good reason why a bumping module wouldn't improve the game tactics, and game lore in itself, i'm open to hear them Because you're a whining carebear who needs to adapt or die. Umm, well, you see, i know how to adapt and not to die, but could you when a system that you've used for ages was removed and replaced by a better and more logical system? It's all fine and dandy to say "adapt or die" if you're willing to do so yourself, but most people who say it, won't be able to budge one inch of their own beaten path. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:29:00 - [21] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Darklorden If we had a true "cold hard world of EVE" there wouldn't be any Concord or high or low sec space, just lawless space everywhere. Since this game needs a steady income to stay alive there has to be some rules, otherwise only the hardcore players would still remain after the gankatons had passed by. A friend of mine got warned after being petitioned for a few "harmless" bumps. Not the point really. shooting ships in lowsec/0.0 has rules. Bumping ships should have same rules. If anyone can give a good reason why a bumping module wouldn't improve the game tactics, and game lore in itself, i'm open to hear them BECAUSE IT'S A MODULE THAT INTERACTS WITH SHIP VELOCITY, MASS AND AGILITY! ALL MODULES THAT DID THAT WERE NERFBATTED TO MOLECULAR COMPOUNDS ----------------------------------------- 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 11:30:00 - [22] Originally by: Concorduck BECAUSE IT'S A MODULE THAT INTERACTS WITH SHIP VELOCITY, MASS AND AGILITY! ALL MODULES THAT DID THAT WERE NERFBATTED TO MOLECULAR COMPOUNDS But...it doesn't. It interacts with the collision avoiding system i place(lore wise), rendering it offline My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
T'rek	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:32:00 - [23] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 31/12/2008 11:29:30 Originally by: T'rek Originally by: Sheriff Jones If anyone can give a good reason why a bumping module wouldn't improve the game tactics, and game lore in itself, i'm open to hear them Because you're a whining carebear who needs to adapt or die. Umm, well, you see, i know how to adapt and not to die, but could you when a system that you've used for ages was removed and replaced by a better and more logical system? It's all fine and dandy to say "adapt or die" if you're willing to do so yourself, but most people who say it, won't be able to budge one inch of their own beaten path. Give me an "anti-bumping" module and I could care less, but for all the carriers/battleships/anything that has ever been bumped off station, I think they are going to tell you to live with it. Imho, the anti-bumping modules are 1600mm plates.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:33:00 - [24] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Concorduck BECAUSE IT'S A MODULE THAT INTERACTS WITH SHIP VELOCITY, MASS AND AGILITY! ALL MODULES THAT DID THAT WERE NERFBATTED TO MOLECULAR COMPOUNDS But...it doesn't. It interacts with the collision avoiding system i place(lore wise), rendering it offline OH, then it's not doable at all. You know, the bubble system the client and server use to create the space simulation and stuff? well, it works on collision bubbles. Rendering them offline...duh... ----------------------------------------- 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 11:35:00 - [25] Originally by: T'rek Give me an "anti-bumping" module and I could care less, but for all the carriers/battleships/anything that has ever been bumped off station, I think they are going to tell you to live with it. Imho, the anti-bumping modules are 1600mm plates. Again, missing the point. Simply because things are like "this", doesn't mean they wouldn't be better like "that". If bumping became dependent on your fitting, it would give A: more tactics. B: more reality(even if EVE isn't the pinnacle of it). C: make risk vs reward more the norm. D: remove the need for "petition harassment" on bumping. And such. Only reason why people would be against bumping, is, as you said, if they can't adapt to it My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Darwin Duck Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:36:00 - [26] Bumping should be allowed, but it should also be fixed. A frigate should not be able to bump battleships. The BS should not even notice that the frig bumped into it.
T'rek	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:39:00 - [27] Originally by: Darwin Duck Bumping should be allowed, but it should also be fixed. A frigate should not be able to bump battleships. The BS should not even notice that the frig bumped into it. They don't...
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:41:00 - [28] Originally by: T'rek Originally by: Darwin Duck Bumping should be allowed, but it should also be fixed. A frigate should not be able to bump battleships. The BS should not even notice that the frig bumped into it. They don't... ...Until it's too late ----------------------------------------- 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 11:41:00 - [29] 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? My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.12.31 11:43:00 - [30] 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. Originally by: Zauberkraft combat situation .. my ship was destroyed in downtime .. still fine at 11:00 .. shutdown imminent This is somewhat known and legal 'combat tactic'. The difference here is, that in theory you, and your friends, can shoot the offender to make it stop. Otherwise, the loss of your ship sounds interesting, although probably nothing out of ordinary there. To clarify: 1) Did you stay online till server disconnected you (instead of closing the client at some point)? 2) How much more time the attackers needed to kill the ship? That is, how much armor/structure you had left, and what kind of hostiles were close by? 3) Was there interdictor bubble around you and attackers at the down time? As FYI: the servers do not go down when players get disconnected, they stay up and connectable for random short (say 10 secs to few mins) period. Thus it is very much possible that you were barely alive when everyone was disconnected. The attackers could then have just quickly reconnected, and kept shooting at you for a few rounds. -Lasse who thinks servers should not accept connections after downtime disconnect..
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. ____
Highwind Cid	Posted - 2009.01.02 18:10:00 - [61] Originally by: Concorduck 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. Actually, your both right, both the points proven are ridiculous and should be fixed. For the latter with the obvious exception of being docked, your ship should be in space if ctrl+Q'd for say 15 minutes, no matter what. For the former, actually put the numbers next to Mass on ship info to use and figure out a way to make sense of what should actually happen when a frigate bumps into a freighter. Any suggestions/comments/wiseguys?
Wolfae Minmatar	Posted - 2009.01.02 19:13:00 - [62] Originally by: supr3m3justic3 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. That's the first thing you found wrong with my suggestion? lol
Dantes Revenge Caldari	Posted - 2009.01.02 20:03:00 - [63] If bumping is used as a tactic, there should be some sort of physics involved. Mass/speed should form part of the equation and then bumping a supercap or even a freighter with a frig wouldn't be so ridiculously easy. A frig should just bounce off a ship that size with practically no effect. It's a tactic but IMO, a pretty lame one as it shows no skill. If you want to stop something warping, there are already modules for that. Now that there are ways to stop a supercap warping, this bumping tactic should be revised in terms of physics or removed completely. -- There's a simple difference between kinky and perverted. Kinky is using a feather to get her in the mood. Perverted is using the whole chicken. All this has happened before and will happen again
Straight Chillen Gallente Solar Wind	Posted - 2009.01.02 20:40:00 - [64] Originally by: Dantes RevengeIt's a tactic but IMO, a pretty lame one as it shows no skill. [/quote I completely disagree. I think bumping is probably one of the last few things that actually requires a good deal of skill. And im not talking skillpoints, im talking know how. Bumping Caps off station is an art, which few are good at. And bumping is based on speed and mass. Its just that too much weight is on the Speed part. Bump a freighter with an inty, and then a Nano Phoon and u will notice quite a big difference in the results. I know this isnt about bumping ships off station, but rather bumping then so they cannot warp off. Which is fairly lame, But there are things you can do to counter the bumps, but I will not list them here, as they are rather easy to discover if you spend some time playing around. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.02 20:55:00 - [65] Originally by: Dantes Revenge It's a tactic but IMO, a pretty lame one as it shows no skill. If you want to stop something warping, there are already modules for that. Now that there are ways to stop a supercap warping, this bumping tactic should be revised in terms of physics or removed completely. There are still point-click navigation skills required, wich 90% of the eve's playerbase seems to be missing. and, seriously, only few people can keep something really bumped down to 2m/s for some time. ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Milla Jovo	Posted - 2009.01.02 21:23:00 - [66] Edited by: Milla Jovo on 02/01/2009 21:24:25 This thread reminded me of the star trek movie when Picard rams the enterprise into that other ship. All the damage that happened, all the little bits of ship parts drifting in space. way cool. Little tiny ships should not send my orca spinning like a top!!!!! edit for spelling...
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.01.02 22:42:00 - [67] Originally by: Dantes Revenge If bumping is used as a tactic, there should be some sort of physics involved. Mass/speed should form part of the equation and then bumping a supercap or even a freighter with a frig wouldn't be so ridiculously easy. A frig should just bounce off a ship that size with practically no effect. It's a tactic but IMO, a pretty lame one as it shows no skill. If you want to stop something warping, there are already modules for that. Now that there are ways to stop a supercap warping, this bumping tactic should be revised in terms of physics or removed completely. This is the standard whine and is just not true. I suggest you actually play the game and test the mechanics before you talk about them. You can bump a cruiser much, much farther than you can bump a mothership using the same bumping ship going the same speed. So gee whiz, looks like speed/mass is involved isn't it? Besides, the web nerf severely nerfed bumping. It is easy to bump a ship going 0 m/s since you just approach. Any ship going above ~35 m/s is much harder to bump because if you just use approach you will miss unless you get exactly inline with your opponents speed. With nerfed webs and the opposing pilot using his brain and actually flying his ship, being bumped is extremely easy to avoid. I have avoided being bumped by the elite pvp alliances/corporations of EVE and it is not difficult. If you don't want to be bumped then like don't do something stupid and whine when you get bumped and pwned. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
JoeT Amarr Short Attention Span Paisti Syndicate	Posted - 2009.01.03 07:19:00 - [68] Originally by: PsychoBones I believe if you're doing it just to be a jackass (example: bumping a random freighter that is trying to warp) it's punishable. However, it's legitimate as a combat tactic. Pretty much on the head. If you do not have reasonable Firepower to take it out, then you cant bump it (only in empire). Bumping in low and null sec is game. Maybe i can find the Dev post from a couple years back on this. - We are anonymous. We Are legion.
gallminin Gallente Playboy Enterprises Dark Taboo	Posted - 2009.01.03 07:45:00 - [69] Originally by: PsychoBones I believe if you're doing it just to be a jackass (example: bumping a random freighter that is trying to warp) it's punishable. However, it's legitimate as a combat tactic. haha oh thats why those pilots get so angry.. huh. hehe ---Asus M2N SLI Deluxe wireles edition.- XFX 8800GT 512MB DDR3 - 6GB G.Skill - AMD 6400+ am2 @3.2 with a zalman cooler---
Schalac Caldari Apocalypse Reign	Posted - 2009.01.03 10:54:00 - [70] Definitely an exploit, smaller ships should explode on contact.
JSkywalker Brotherhood of Wolves	Posted - 2009.01.03 11:46:00 - [71] Originally by: Schalac Definitely an exploit, smaller ships should explode on contact. I like this more: not an exploit, But ships should get damaged on contact, at least 45% for the smallest ship, and the same damage to the other ship... This way anyone could survive a 'bump' or two... I dont like the idea of flying in JITA and getting CONCORDED because of a 'bump'.... -- JSkywalker
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.03 12:15:00 - [72] Bump = No Damage. Bump is fine. ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.01.03 12:44:00 - [73] "everything that kills me is exploit"
Ghoest	Posted - 2009.01.03 13:43:00 - [74] If you do it in high sec just to prevent someone from playing the game its an exploit. If you think corp is different than a guild or clan you have some insecurity issues.
D'nitra LaBorget	Posted - 2009.01.03 16:37:00 - [75] Edited by: D''nitra LaBorget on 03/01/2009 16:37:51 not to be a broken record, but just like a post on the first page said: bumping is not considered an exploit under any conditions I too found this out after filing a petition, and getting a GM response.
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.03 17:04:00 - [76] Originally by: Ghoest If you do it in high sec just to prevent someone from playing the game its an exploit. Oh noes, it was written by an alt, IT MUST BE TRUE! ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.