A ship approaching another to,
take a can thats about to be dropped
just get close to/reposition with/follow someone
be ready to attack because it’s blattent neutral rr
Bring and object into salvage range of another.
Trying to get me to jump through hoops isn’t going to help you. Right click and approaching other ships is a normal part of movement. Its not gonna get a suspect flag.
No amount will be able to determine intent without the potential to either be exploited or accidentally send people suspect because they are just flying close to each other.
Yes it sounds like we are in agreement.
I could hire you to do my TLDR in future.
You are right, that is a terrible idea, but that isn’t anything close to anything I’ve said.
If you tackle a ship in high-sec, you get flagged and shot at, bumping works like tackling, the main problem is determining “intent”. So, what I said is if there was no “intent” to bump (given through clicks in the client) there is no bump, the ships pass through each-other just like during undocks. If there is “intent” it gets treated just like a tackle.
If they did that, they couldn’t bump. There is no bump, the DST aligns just fine.
I didn’t say this. I said if BOTH ships are set to green, then they pass thought each-other. I didn’t make bumping mutual, the aggressor can still chose to bump the victim against the victim’s will, but it would make the flagging clear.
I didn’t say clicking should. I said if a bump occurs from your intentional moving toward another ship, and that other ship hasn’t intentionally moved toward you, that the bump is your fault, that you are the aggressor.
Most of those have already been addressed. In fact the not all intentional bumping is hostile was already addressed that their are “friendly” reasons to bump. But, most of those could be solved by fleet/corp mechanics, if two ships are set “friendly” to each-other, there is a chance that their actions are friendly to each-other. At least a chance. 
What if bumps only happened when someone clicked a button that says “bump the other guy”? That’s kind of clear on the intent.
And what if a bump does occur during this normal movement cause you’re not paying full attention or you clicked the wrong bracket in the cluster of other brackets or you failed to press ctrl-space in time?
Suspect? For simply moving your ship?
Too many ways this can go wrong. And i think you grossly under estimate how many people ‘approach’ other ships without malicious intent.
That would be pretty clear on intent. But it’s a clunky solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
No, not at all, you would get the flag for
If in the your normal moving of your ship you target another ship to approach it, and then you press F1 (guns) instead of Alt+F1 (MWD) because you weren’t paying attention, you didn’t get the flag for “moving”.
Also, remember my suggestion basically applies to ships that aren’t already interacting with each-other, it wasn’t to apply to non-player ships/objects or any fleets engaged in combat,
I don’t under estimate it, I just think that if your actions can do bad things to other people, you are responsible for those actions.
And this brings me back to my first point. That all of these threads are people arguing about a solution, when can’t can’t even agree on what the problem is, or if there is even a problem.
Sometimes it’s the journey, not the destination.
Define ‘bad things’.
Is a tractoring ship moving a wreck closer to a salvaging ship wanting to do ‘bad things’? What if they had eachother locked because moments ago they were providing cap assistance?
When i approach and lock another ship because its a logi ship hovering around a fight between warring players, i may intend to do bad things, but it would be stupid for me to go suspect before the logi ship repairs someone in the fight.
Too many ways it will go wrong.
And you’re right, there is no concensus that there is even a problem in the first place. Which is what people were saying when you put up the poll. And thats how you answered your own question a long way back.
Some might say someone being able to move 7billion in combat ready ships and equipment across highsec to a new staging, with no chance of interdiction
is a ‘bad thing’ as well
@Anjyl_Took PVP means player VERSUS player, the pew pew guys often act like they are the only ones doing PVP
but traders and haulers also do ‘bad things’, in the sense their actions can have negative consequences often intended, on others.
Trade is PVP, Industry is PVP, it isn’t the backbone of PVP or anything like that, its pure PVP.
There is an interview on YouTube with RitaJita the renowned trader, where he states he usde to be Major Thrasher in RedvBlue and he decided he was going to make a char and ‘PVP the markets’. According to eveMogul he made c.5billion profit yesterday, and he does this and more day after day. He says (who knows actually this is eve) that most of this is arbitrage trading, taking advantage of the price difference between regions etc. His all time profit (on mogul, not nec. ALL TIME) is over 7 trillion isk.
He is my competitor in trade PVP- how are either of us not doing ‘bad things’ to each other in the sense you use the term.
Hauling is PVP without guns, but it IS pvp, ask Rita Jita.
I specifically excluded any object that was not a player ship, wrecks are not piloted ships.
They intended to interact with each-other, if a “bad thing” then happens, they can’t say they didn’t intend it.
Yes, your action made it clear that you intended to interact in some way.
Of course that would be stupid! And that isn’t any thing close to anything that I, or anyone else, has been saying, except for you offering it as a straw man.
What I have said is that if you don’t target or click “approach” there would be no way the system could say you intended the bump, therefore it would be an “accidental” contact, and in my suggestion, not be a bump, but cause the two ships to pass through each-other just like during undock.
But if bumping is a “bad thing”, and if your intentional actions lead to the bump, then you are responsible for the bump. And you should be treated accordingly.
I’m making no effort to define “bad things” that isn’t the point, the point is the connection of the intentional action to the result. If I forget to set the brake on my car when it’s parked on a hill, I haven’t really done anything wrong, but if it then rolls down the hill and hurts someone, it’s my fault for my (in)action in setting the brake. My argument is that “cause and effect” exists, and your question is implying that only bad effects have causes.
As regarding what flag might get set or what actions might happen to someone who “intentionally” bumps someone, that can only be addressed after “intent” is sorted out. Which was my point about working through things from the bottom, one step at a time.
I don’t think anyone has said otherwise, I know my suggestion was for bumping and ganking and blowing up freighters, but making the bumping ship legally part of the gank.
Are you bumping each-other in the market? Because my use of the term “bad things” just meant “a bump”. If bumping is a “bad thing”, and if your intentional actions lead to the bump, then you are responsible for the bump. And you should be treated accordingly. I didn’t say anything about PvP, gank free travel, rape, incest, or anything else. I wasn’t defining all bad things in the world or even the world of Eve.
If bumping is equivalent to point, then it should be treated equivalent. The difference is that to apply point you have to target the ship and switch on a module, which declares “intent” to the server. What I have suggested is a way for the server to also determine “intent”. Also, for all the matters, this discussion could even be limited to bumps that interrupt alignment/docking/etc., since these are the cases in which bump = point?
As was noted, then I’ll bring 2 or 3 bumpers and rotate through thus avoiding the flag. If it is not allowed with a single player multi-boxing, then bring another player and rotate through.
That has been pointed out in just about everyone of these kinds of threads.
Yes, it is a good question that @Patti_Potato_Patrouette asks, but one I have already suggested an answer to, more than once. But, everyone appears to be unable to read, or as you pointed out in the second post just interested in the “party lines” and typical replies. As indicated by her question about not being able to determine intent coming as a reply to a reply of my post where I listed out a plan for it:
No pilot could do anything (outside of mind games) to make another player instigate a bump.
This doesn’t end bumping, it doesn’t end ganking, and it doesn’t affect any game mechanics excerpt two player ships in the same place who have not intentionally interacted with each-other.
If im dragging a wreck to another ship im approaching the ship, not the wreck.
Your answer to the problems with your idea is ‘if you make a mistake, tough’ even though they are just performing normal non-malicious actions.
It’s simply not good enough.
Do you know what a “premise” is?
The premise of my idea is that the “bump” being discussed is a “malicious action”. If the bumping being discussed is a “normal non-malicious action” then ‘if you make a mistake, tough’ doesn’t have anything to do with anything.
You have already stated that you don’t think bumping is bad, so unless you change that idea, or can at least temporally hold a position you don’t actually agree with, you can’t contribute in any useful way to anything I’ve said. You are however able to attack straw men, fall back to “bumping is fine”, and flat out ignore the last paragraph/sentence of my post that you just replied to and the numerous other times that I have said your “examples” don’t fit what I said.
You keep saying that “setting a flag” (my words) means you will “go suspect” (your words), and so no flag can be set by intent. “Bump = suspect flag” is your argument, not mine; this is a Straw Man, this is not what I said, or anything close to what I said, as I haven’t addressed what should be done after determining intent. There are many in-game “flags”, not just “suspect” (maybe it gets a weapon flag?), and “setting a flag” doesn’t even have to be anything seen in-game. The server-side can hold a flag showing who “stared the fight” without there even needing to be a fight, then if it comes to a fight, the server knows who the aggressor was.
All I have addressed is how the server can know who “caused” the bump, so it can be marked by the system. And yes, in all of your examples, you cause the bump (if there is a bump) not the ship that is sitting there being approached by you.
That still doesn’t determine intent and by flag you are implying suspect. If not explain exactly what this flag is for. Otherwise you don’t even have the beginning of an idea, so why whine so much that people don’t get your idea?
“Intent” is a way of saying “the intentional actions of one pilot caused the event to happen.” If the event cannot happen without an intentional action on the part of one of the parties, there will then always be “intent”. Granted, sometimes mistakes are made that a player didn’t intend, but as far as the game is concerned it has to treat all inputs as intentional.
If any in-game flag was implied by what I said it would have been “criminal” (since I said bumping was like applying point), but I never said anything about what type of flag or “going flashy” or anything else like that. You weren’t paying attention and assumed “suspect”, which if you were paying attention you wouldn’t have assumed, because you should have assumed “criminal”. Others, not I, have thrown around suspect flags with my idea, and they could be a possible outcome from determining “intent”, but by no means the only outcome.
This was exactly what you jumped into claiming that I had
My point was that things had to be discussed one piece at a time and not as entire “ideas” because then they get too confusing and people mix arguments premises and proposed solutions. So, you entered the discussion by agreeing with me that we had to only talk about one point at a time (this point being “intent”), but now you are dismissing things because of it.
I think “how to determine who caused a bump?” is a complete “idea”, I don’t know what you think an “idea” is, maybe you aren’t too familiar with them. I have not, however presented a full solution yet, and will not do so until the foundation blocks are laid.
The ideas I have addressed in this thread are:
Back on point> Your examples would have some meaning if you were trying to show that the other ship should be blamed as the one to cause the “bump”. As is pointed out regarding the ideas about assigning blame based on ship size or speed.
What…pass through each other? Then there is simply no bumping at all.
Computers cannot discern intent (currently).
This still suffers from the “intent” problem. How do you know ships are not intending to interact? You can probably figure it out, but a computer cannot.
The rest of your points fail because your premise is fatally flawed.
Sorry. Now, you can be pissy about it, or you can try to tell us why your first bullet point,
Does not suffer from the “intent problem”. Note, I helped by high lighting a sub-part of one of the words you used.
Yes an idea would include a problem and a solution. Simply defining intent (which you haven’t aside from a clumsy mechanic) is irrelevant if no one knows what to do once intent is determined.