About Bumping

[Solstice_Projekt]

heh, fair point … maybe we should find a better thread, then.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Wavemistress_Moidel

Just making an observation, but if high-sec were given the choice then the big boys out in null would not make quite as much isk because the competition would have a semblance of a chance.

Warp scrams/disruptors/bubbles are completely adequate for preventing warp, and thats why they exist.

Bumping will still bump a ship, but the warp prevention aspect currently obfuscates/deprecates actually using modules designed for that purpose of preventing warp.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Solstice_Projekt

As much as he begs for attention, recognition … you should stop giving it to him. And everyone else who is not fragile, who does not live in a world where words on the internet can alter their emotional stability, should do the same thing.

I dunno about your social life, or what culture you are from, but its quite universal that if you insult people and treat them badly, they will not respond favorably.

As to Dom, I already decided I will never respond to him again.
This has clearly upset him, and he is trying his damnedest to get my attention back on him again. Now he wants my attention so goddam bad, but will never get it.

[Galaxy_Chicken]

LoL! this thread delivers.

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

@Salvos_Rhoska

You are conflating “change” with “harm”. Whale hunters can simply use warp interruption modules instead. That’s why they exist. Point the ship, or bubble it. Bumping will still bump a ship, just not affect aligning, and thus prevent warping,

Unintended consequences, are, well unintended. These may be either beneficial or harmful in nature, depending on whom is in question. As “unintended”, they are unpredictable, and as unpredictable cannot be predicted beforehand.

Change, is, well, change. By nature, it changes the status quo, and requires players to adapt.

I am looking at potential harm, which in one definition is a change with a negative context. If this proposal were implemented, then there are potential harms. My #1 refers to the most immediate in that the resource cost of whale hunting is likely to rise meaning that their profits would likely decrease. If this is your intent of your proposal then that’s fine, but is that is the case, then understand that the choice to cause harm to one subset of players over the betterment of another subset of players strays into the realm of politics. Policy review is noting what predicting what will happen.

The more important a system is to regular play (like basic warping), the more important it is to attempt to look ahead and game out the potential problems and changes to other systems down the line. That the future is not yet written is no excuse avoid calculated predictions. Isn’t this what statistics is about?

Considering I worded my whole answer about possible negative ramifications of the change, your # 3 has little to do with my # 3. My point was if CCP breaks Warping because they were mucking about with the warp mechanics trying to accomplish your proposal, then I would hope that the potential harm is obvious.

You asked about harm. Considering that your proposal is not in implementation, then we can only look for potential harm. That’s what I gave you.

This is the part where you go to political mode (as anyone should) and and justify the possible harms over the possible benefits. Personally, my #2 and 3 are of more concern than # 1. Of course players will adapt, but the why of making the change still stands. What need is there to risk breaking major components of EvE?

–Gadget looks to have a busy day, so may not respond quickly (sorry)

[Dom_Arkaral]

@Salvos_Rhoska

As to Dom, I already decided I will never respond to him again.

This just shows how closed off to facts you are lol
Naysaying will never make the truth go away, it will only get you laughed at

@Salvos_Rhoska

This has clearly upset him, and he is trying his damnedest to get my attention back on him again.

You can’t see how pleased I am to see you react like this
You got outplayed pretty bad

@Salvos_Rhoska

Now he wants my attention so goddam bad, but will never get it.

Another cute edit to your post
Shows how much you actually care

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Gadget_Helmsdottir

–Gadget looks to have a busy day, so may not respond quickly (sorry)

Dont worry.

Bump will still displace a ship from its current location.
Warp scram/disruptor/bubble will still prevent warp.

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

No worries.

Your proposal is unlikely to be implemented.

• No one of import will see it (This is still in GD under a ‘how easy it is to avoid bumping’ thread).
• CCP has acknowledged in writing that bumping to interfere with warp mechanics is OK.
• CCP recently chose not to implement a bump timer (why, I don’t know).

Having said that, I still thank you for the mental exercise.

–Appreciative Gadget

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Gadget_Helmsdottir

–Appreciative Gadget

We will see.

The proposal is pragmatic and fair.

Bumping will still perform its primary function, which is displacing a ship from its current location.

Warp interference via scram/disruptor/bubble will work as before.

Post change, you can still bump and you can still prevent warp.

Equity is retained, albeit, changed.

[Galaxy_Chicken]

He just keeps saying that…

This is truly bizarre.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Galaxy_Chicken

He just keeps saying that…

Why is it so important to you that bumping breaks warping?

Is it not enough that bumping displaces the ship?
Is it not enough that you can prevent warp with scram/disruptor/bubble?

[Galaxy_Chicken]

I’m much more worried about your mental state, brother. The way you’re behaving is certainly not normal where I come from, shrug, maybe it’s cultural. Do all Finnish people repeat themselves over and over and over and over again until their audience begins to wonder about them?

[Dom_Arkaral]

His spam bot is broken

He ignores the facts put up in his face and repeats over an over (I think it’s the 20th time he says the same thing)

[Dyver_Phycad]

@Scipio_Artelius

Similarly, on the whole “if someone is aligning, they should be nump immune” thing, will also affect lowsec pvp. Bumping on gates is a way that smaller ships (eg. small frigate gang with logistics), can engage much larger targets like battleships.

Any so far surfaced nerf to bumping would not impact this at all. You can still bump a a BS off the gate if you want. You just have to commit an actual point before, for instance, 3 minutes have past and the ship automatically warps. Please, if you complain about other people being too narrow-minded, don’t make the same mistake.

None of the scenarios that you brought up would be impacted in any way if bumping was more limited and had some conditions.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Galaxy_Chicken

I’m much more worried about your mental state, brother.

My mental state is fine, bro.
Your concern is appreciated, but unwarranted.

I am repeating myself to keep the topic, ontopic, and in particular to keep this proposal from being buried by gish and irrelevancy.

The proposal works, and is sound, nominally.
Whether CCP sees it that way, is up to them.

Bumping will still bump.
Warp scram/disruptors/bubbles will still prevent warp.

[Dom_Arkaral]

@Salvos_Rhoska

proposal

Something something this is General Discussion
Not Player Ideas and Features (where it will get shut down as much as it did here )

[Avaelica_Kuershin]

@Dyver_Phycad

You just have to commit an actual point before, for instance, 3 minutes have past and the ship automatically warps.

What ever happened to that proposal?
It’s basically the same as Salvos is proposing, so what made CCP back off?
Are there consequences to warping while bumped that we haven’t seen?
(I mean consequences to the way the game works, not to the way bumpers and gankers use bumping)

Perhaps it would tangle the spaghetti code?

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Avaelica_Kuershin

It’s basically the same as Salvos is proposing, so what made CCP back off?

We dont know.

In the proposal to decouple aligning from bumping, the follow occurs as aggregate:

-Bumping still bumps a ship in space, from its current location, as is the primary function of bumping.

-Warp scrams/disruptors/bubbles still prevent warp, as is their primary purpose.

Equity is retained.

Bumping, bumps.
Warp interferers, interfere with warping.

[Dyver_Phycad]

Read this thread and you know what happened to this thought experiment.

[Salt_Foambreaker]

Oh come on, lets be real:

1. It is not the bumping, it is the destruction that follows
2. If you don’t want your ship destroyed then the REAL FIX is not to expect to survive a 10v1 attack

The FACT is these people are wanting to fly around solo and survive a 10v1 attack. If they instead made friends and didn’t travel alone bumping would not be an issue or would not end in the destruction of the ship.

If you are solo you are doing it wrong.