Yes, the law of unintended consequences in action, IMO.
My guess is that the people “asked for the change” may have been fine–i.e. they might have been smart enough to fit for tank vs. cargo hold. It was all the other freighter pilots who don’t read the forums who ended up on the crap end of the stick. They saw the changes, went to fit for cargo size and then over loaded (even more) and got ganked.
This happens alot too. Some subset of people ask for a special benefit, they get it and use it well, the rest of the people don’t use it well and end up subsidizing those who do use it well.
Basically…these things are far more complicated than alot of the reasoning on the forums (and IRL) suggest.
Ah, they have already committed a point. Usually scrams and webs as well.
That’s why those ships, relying on their EHP, often don’t engage, but instead Burn back to gate. Bumping is used to keep them from getting back into jump range, and to get them to engage, causing an aggression timer that removes the option of jumping out.
If they can just align back to the gate and be bump immune, then that absolutely will affect current lowsec, and even nullsec, PvP - for an issue that is not a problem at all in low and null.
I probably shouldn’t claim to represent the ganking community since I’m not a part of it, but I have spent some time studying my in game enemy, and feel qualified to make a couple of casual observations.
Though I won’t make the claim it is absolutely true of all players in the ganking community, they don’t give me the impression that they want to be unfair. I can’t recall seeing a ‘make ganking easier’ thread.
I consider that their point of view is that of a body who was open to compromise initially, and that compared to the past we are well on our way to that middle ground with no sign that we’d ever reach it.
A compromise is when neither side gets all of what they want, but all sides get some of what they want. I don’t see this as being historically the case with our ‘compromises’ so far, and it seems likely that no matter how far you slide in favor of limiting hisec PvP, so long as it remains feasible there will be those who lobby strongly for additional sanctions against criminals, wardeccers, or the like.
Unless the law abiding citizenry of hisec want to give up something, or bestow something on their rival, no negotiation can really take place. Further, framing arguments in terms of real world cause and effect impedes the discussion. Real world conflict costs real world lives, which we have only one of each. In game conflict, on the other hand, represents a form of entertainment where life is cheap. Free, even.
The perspective of a discussion of Eve mechanics should be something along the lines of ‘what changes would make me want to play this game more’. What can be done to make the game more engaging? Being bumped for a half hour isn’t fun, but isn’t that the situation we’ve put ourselves in by making that the only practical option for the enemy to engage, to conflict, with us? If we succeeded in eliminating ganking, would we really be happy? Or would be just be bored because what we set out to do became trivial. Our success assured and our presence not required to achieve it?
Bumping is not a prerequisite of a gank, or aggression. You dont HAVE to bump, to gank/aggress.
Bumping consist of two elements, in order of primacy:
–The physical displacement of the ship in space
–Disrupting its alignment in preparation for warp.
If the alignment disruption effect was removed, the physical displacement part still remains, as is its primary function. Ie: Bumping miners off rocks/ice or a ship burning back to gate.
The part on preventing its entry to warp, is already readily available with warp scrams/disruptors/bubbles. Thats why those modules exist.
Warp scrams/disruptors/bubbles CANNOT cause a bump.
I dont see an equitable reason why bumping thus should BOTH bump the ship AND disrupt its warping.
Physically bumping a ship is ONLY possible by colliding with it. No other way to do it.
Warp prevention should ONLY be possible by applying warp preventing scram/disruptor/bubble.
Does anyone know how a ship in mid-aligning gets affected in range of a MJFG?
Uni Wiki only specifies that scrambled ships are not moved.
-Gadget selectively remembers, because just before they made that decision they destroyed the emergent gameplay of the AG players who were ganking freighter wrecks by upping the EHP of freighter wrecks, so as a balance to that loss of fun gameplay, they applied the passive resists that they originally did not intend to apply.
As for bumping, I rather like Salvos’s suggestion, because I don’t like this be able to bump someone for hours bullshite. I want to see ganks happen around gates and people using gate cloaks and stuff to make it harder for the gankers.
If we keep bumping as is then Freighters need to be able to run a BS MWD to enable more effective counter play against a unskilled or inattentive bumper. Freighter pilots would of course need to set up multiple BM’s around gates…
A bump should just be a bump.
A point should just be a point. (Scram and disruptor are different points)
A bubble should just be a bubble.
None should do what the others do, or the others are rendered obsolete.
Its not relevant that pointing is a criminal flag in HS, or that bubbles are not allowed in HS.
This is not about changing HS/LS/NS rules.
If you want to displace a ship, bump it.
If you want to prevent it warping, point it/bubble it.
Its a very simple, neat and elegant rationalization of bumping.
As to impact on HS suicide ganking, just point the target, as per usual, if you want to prevent warp.
But remember that when you do so, CONCORD will arrive and be on grid to rapidly deal with subsequent flagged criminals there, so be careful when you engage first point on the target for the gank.
Ask @Salvos_Rhoska about warping mechanics
Or how long you hold cloak when entering a system
Or how easy it is to not be a pilot with all the available tools
For a guy who doesn’t play he sure does have deep opinions about stuff he doesn’t even comprehend
And it seems like you don’t understand the physics behind bumping either
You obviously do not understand them. Otherwise you would stop defending a warp disruption module that can aggress in high sec without concord intervention.
I still maintain freighters are capital ships that are intended to be vulnerable and require a support fleet for their protection. They should not have button to escape a PvP engagement like that.
That said, what if Command Destroyers could jump fleet mates in highsec? When first announced I was convinced that part of the reason they were being introduced was as a counter to bumping, but then CCP went and turned the module off in highsec. I get why offensive use would be banned in highsec - you have to protect those Incursion runners after all - but I don’t see any reason, other than perhaps a technical one to code it into the game, that you shouldn’t be able to move fleetmates around with one in highsec.
You seem fixated on this idea. Why can’t bumping prevent warp? The physics of bumping were put into the game so that you can influence larger ships by ramming into them, which as a result can mean they take longer to align to get into warp. If CCP intended for bumping to affect alignment, then the obvious consequence is that it will also prevent/delay warping.
I can see the arguments around the legality of this in highsec, and even whether this is good game play, but I don’t see how you have arrived at your dogmatic conclusion that the two things should be mutually exclusive.
But that all aside, how does your proposal to remove the ability to delay the entry of ships into warp by bumping them square with your view that not enough goods are interdicted or destroyed in highsec? A direct consequence of removing bumping is that it will decrease the number of transport ships destroyed and increase the cost of doing so. Even less things will be destroyed while moving about in highsec than today.
If we accept your dogma and delete bumping by say having ships enter warp at a specific time after pressing the warp button no matter heading or speed, what compensatory changes to the game do you propose to maintain the same level of destruction in highsec?
Why can’t I prevent warp with bumping? Warping requires alignment, and alignment is open to be influenced by other players ergo other players can prevent me from warping by bumping me.
Ok, there are modules that prevent warp by other means, but why can’t I use the intended physics of Eve to do the same thing?
pilot with all the available tools