Anti-Bumping Modules - Anchor/Grapnel

Alright, takin’ a big risk here with my first real feature idea, so be gentle with me.

We all know miner bumping is accepted, not an exploit, part of the game, etc. and is just something miners have to deal with. The lesson being to adapt, right? Well, if I were some kind of engineer trying to solve this problem for my miner buddies, I’d perhaps come up with…

Idea 1 - The Space Anchor

Just what it sounds like, a module that makes a ship strongly resistant to bumping (not 100% sure about the real mechanics here, I’d think it’s just artificially increasing the ship’s mass), while inflicting a penalty on something else mining-related. Maybe yield, scanner range, etc. We have modules that reduce mass, why not an active one that radically increases it? Correct me if I’m wrong about the mass thing, but if I’m really far off, there’s option two…

Idea 2 - The Rock Grapnel

Takes up a highslot, perhaps, so potentially a big impact on yield, but you can target a rock and fling a grapnel into it, preventing your ship from being bumped past the length of the cable. Perhaps start the length crazy short, like 2500m, increasable with skills. When the rock burns up you’d lose your anchor, so there’s an element of vulnerability and some impetus not to be AFK while mining.

Look guys, bumping is a fact of life. I know it’s a source of huge joy for some, as much as it is a source of salt. However, you can’t begrudge the poor, innovative miner coming up with practical engineering solutions to problems.

Just dock in the structure.


Can you stop being lazy and trying to get CCP to change things to make up for your laziness?

At least try with your miner hate, really…
“To stop getting bumped just don’t play”…
I mean seriously, that’s your solution?

@Op. You want these things called Higgs rigs off the top of my head. Already in game.

1 Like

Oh piss off, kid.
Anyone can see that the OP just wants to make his mining easier and safer for himself.

It exists. It’s called the Higgs Anchor rig.

What is the impact on yield for a drone miner?

And only the miner ships that use drones are subject to bumping really.

So -1 to both of these ideas.

If you don’t want to be bumped, use the existing mechanics to increase your mass. They not only include the Higgs Anchor Rig, but also webifiers, and MWDs. Or just rely on the warp timer to get away in 3 minutes, or fly one of the 95% of ships that are too fast to be bumped.

Really, this isn’t a problem.

You do realize his problem is he wants to stay in one place?

That is why when CCP called the warp timer a fix it was such a joke.

The easiest counter for ships that are using lasers or strip miners, is to orbit something, so the ship isn’t just sitting still. That makes bumping more difficult, but not impossible.

However, even if bumped, those ships can’t be kept bumped unless the player is AFK. They are too agile to be kept in a bumped state.

For and Orca, and to a lesser extent, a Porpoise, CCP already changed the mechanics with the warp timer, so the ship can’t be bumped indefinitely if the player isn’t AFK. They can warp off and warp back.

Not a problem that needs any further change to the game at this stage.

The warp timer wasn’t intended to stop miner bumping. It was intended to stop perma bumping on gates.

Thanks for pointing this out. Looks like it doubles a ship’s mass, and you can only fit one. Would it really help mitigating a bump for say, an Orca?

Also, you can’t offline a rig, so the idea of putting a permanent ‘anchor’ on a ship just seems odd.

That’s the travesty.

Freighter pilots are by definition not new players, miners are.

They should have given the miners something and let the freighter pilots learn teamwork.

If you are also moving so he mostly hits you glancing yes.

If you are standing still like the 8 ball, no he’s going to put you in the pocket :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Orbit just little above the surface of some rock.

New miners aren’t suffering from perma bumping though. They are suffering (if from anything) from ganking.

lol, true, but the gankers are flippin NPCs :crazy_face:

Well yeah… That probably is a little harsh on the new guys.

I’d certainly be up for a rethink of mining progression into standard size lines but starting at Destroyer size for the venture rather than frigate (or even call the venture a cruiser and make the barges more battleship sized in behaviour).
That would give the venture a bit more tank so it has time to warp out.

Then make the FOB response fleets only spawn when the mining fleet is actually attacked and I stead warp in one of the patrol fleets of a few frigates for a neg standing miner. Which is enough to clean any afk miners anyway but doesn’t destroy even non afk people.

But… hey, I’m not CCPs team lead to make these calls. (And I lack python coding and 20 years experience in the field to apply for it)

Right. Except adapting doesn’t mean asking for changes be made to the game. It means figuring how to deal with the problem with the tools that do already exist. This is actually part of the fun for those that are able to appreciate it…

This is precisely the kind of damage that the environment created by your corp/alliance is doing to all of you. They’re making you believe that the natural way to deal with any problem you may encounter in EvE is ask CCP to solve the problem for you. It is not.

Why did you ask for changes be made to the game right away without knowing whether and to what extent the “problem” you’re trying to solve has a solution already? Why didn’t you ask first how to deal with this problem with the tools that do already exist? How can that be considered “adapting” in any way?

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.