Balancing Hi-Sec Freighter Bump Mechanics

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Posting from an random alt to avoid being targeted but here’s a very simple feature / mechanic option that doesn’t do away with freighter bumping but really balances the game play.

Problem: Forever Freighter Bumping. A player in who bumps a freighter pilot has zero risk with no aggression, has unlimited time to form a gank fleet, can’t be attacked without aggression. Basically one bump on the gate and it’s game over for the Freighter PIlot.

Module. A Capital Ship Module, Warp Agility Override Takes 5 minutes to cycle (3 minutes with a level 5 [Insert Skill Here]), effects take place at the end of the cylce. Only available for use in High Sec (So only freighters/JF can use it). Insta Warps the Freighter. Alternatively - a Capital Micro Jump Drive (same restrictions), that allows the freighter pilot to jump out of bump range after the same time.

Balance: Removes the unlimited time frame mechanic for a single player to hold a freighter hostage from the bumping mechanic in hi-sec. The onus is on the Bumper to be organized and have that gank fleet nearby and ready to gank. Why should the gankers be allowed to do other things in game, reship and travel across 3 regions, grab lunch or whatever.

Developer Benefit: Doesn’t require major game mechanic changes or code overwrites that would impact null/low/wh space.

Arguments Against this module.
1. Players should have a web alt or scout. First, CCP has always stipulated they don’t want to force pilots to multi-box, anytime you do that it’s a broken mechanic (Hilmar’s words). Second, as someone who has that Rapier Pilot with faction webs, I can absolutely say I lost a freighter to RNG on the gate based on the bumper just ending up too close when I jumped on to the other side.

  1. This makes being a freighter pilot risk free. Not at all, an organized gank fleet is going to beat the timer. This just provides a counter that brings a little more balance to the bumping trade craft.

  2. This is going to hurt my ransom ISK per hour. The player can choose to pay the ransom or wait for his timer, if I was the bumper I would say, you have 3 minutes the ransom doubles until every ten seconds. Once the gank fleet is here, no deal.

  3. This mechanic isn’t necessary, just don’t haul more than 1 Bil in stuff. Hey think of it this way, you’d see the average haul value of your loot pinata’s go up if people think they are safer. This really has some upside to the whole ganking business. #makelootpinatasgreatagain

Anyway interested in actual feedback… I mean this feels like a good balance without having to dim the lights in Reykjavik and do major code changes.

3 Likes
2

Don’t haul stupid amounts of ■■■■ . Problem solved. It’s that simple…

2 Likes
3

Too much safety renders loot worthless, also post with your main.

2 Likes
4

It’s not safety as the gank can still occurr, it just brings more balance to the gameplay… why should the gank fleet have unlimited time to form?

5 Likes
5

No module should exist without a counter.

For example the MJD can be scrammed. 100% promise that they’ll just ensure they’ve got a cheap frigate/destroyer with a scram on it to break your module. Yea concord will get it after, but the module will have cycled and you’ll be stuck again.

I’ve got a better solution for you.

A friend or an alt with a Hyena.

1 Like
6

The thing is there is no added safety. All this adds is a requirement for gankers to be ready. It requires them to be ready instead of the bumper logging in his alt army and move it over from a central location.

3 Likes
7

It makes it harder to gank, ergo safe travel for the hauler, which means less haulers destroyed, which means more loot competition, which drives the value of loot down and increases the supply.

8

No, it does not make it harder to gank. It only requires gankers to do what they expect from their targets: Be ready to strike. No ganker group has issues with that. If they have issues with being ready when they pinned a target, they need to get better. The timer of 3 minutes for bumping does not make freightering saver if the attackers are ready just as they expect their targets to be ready and prepared.

3 Likes
9

At which point then someone could easily argue why bother with a pointless module?
That’s development time and resources wasted on essentially nothing.

10

Let’s just say they don’t form in time, the player escapes a bump. The player still has to make a risk / reward decision. Do I dock up and play it safe, or do I risk this guy following me and his gank fleet showing up to get me. Decisions still have to be made, and risks continue to have to be evaluated.

1 Like
11

The same code could be retooled for a cyno so it wont activate in low or null. The code already exists for a MJD so that could be repurposed. Really we’re talking graphics and some UI stuff before it made it to SiSi. Edit for a module on the Freighter configs

This is a very low cost solution to implement from a development standpoint.

Edited

12

You’re a coward.
No amount of mechanic changes will give you the courage to fight back with smarts.
Stop overlooking your intelligence.

13

Truth is I have 3 Freighter Pilots, never roll without my 4th pilot who’s in a Rapier with Dual Webs. I probably won’t change that even if the module is implemented. But I’ve had a freighter with 1 Bil get decloaked and bumped before I could shoot it along to the next gate (RNG GODS) and I’ve always felt that bump mechanic needed to have some kind of balance brought to it.

While I obviously appreciate the depth, costs, risks and complexity of moving capitals in null sec has, paying for multiple accounts to do something in empire is a broken mechanic.

2 Likes
14

While I don’t agree with a module being added to counter bumpers, I don’t agree that a bumper should be able to bump you without going yellow to start and ending up red. Eve is skewed against industrial ships and heavily favors the attackers.

15

Get friends?

Seriously, why is it unreasonable that a capital ship requires an escort of some kind? They are extremely powerful ships that are intended to require some support.

Bumping seems pretty balanced to me, maybe moreso than most mechanics. It requires constant attention from the bumper to maintain tackle this doesn’t benefit from alt accounts nor much from anything else like ISK or SP. Further it has counters, even if some might be esoteric and less obvious to some players.

Maybe there could be another way to interdict capital ships in highsec other than bumping that is more intuitive, but whatever it was replaced with would almost certainly still require some support to defend against, either from friends or alts. Just because you can’t AFK the most powerful haulers through highsec unescorted doesn’t mean anything is broken.

4 Likes
16

To remove the option to troll people by permanently bumping their ship without ever attacking. If you’re going to gank a target you do it immediately, you don’t screw around holding them in position indefinitely.

1 Like
17

The reason is Jita undock. Collisions are too frequent in EVE for this to be acceptable. You’d have people undocking, immediately going yellow, and losing their ships because the undock area is too crowded.

1 Like
18

I think as long as you are undocking or tethered that is should not flag you or allow you to bump or something along those lines.

19

Jita undock is just one example of mass carnage that would result. But let’s even ignore accidental bumping and look at deliberate collisions. Oh look, I parked my PvP ship in front of a target I want it to gank, now as soon as it bumps and goes yellow I get to kill it without any CONCORD intervention. You haven’t thought through the consequences at all.

20

I have thought it through, if after x amount of bumps the bumper should go yellow, after x amount of more bumps the bumper should go red. That should not include those corps/alliances that have friendly fire turned on. The bumping mechanic should not apply to ships undocking and I had already posted that.