# Balancing Hi-Sec Freighter Bump Mechanics **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Features & Ideas\ **Created:** [August 4, 2018, 8:37pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363 "2018-08-04T20:37:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 36
**Author:** ![Dom\_Arkaral](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dom_arkaral/32/462611_2.png) [@Dom\_Arkaral](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dom_Arkaral)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 7:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/704 "2018-08-23T19:59:28Z")
> [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > CCP’s suggested timer That was 6 months ago They clearly don’t give a shite and prefer the tears of those dumb enough to die ---
**Author:** ![Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/siegfried_cohenberg/32/423311_2.png) [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Siegfried_Cohenberg)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:02pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/705 "2018-08-23T20:02:50Z")
> [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Bumping =/= ganking. correct, but bumping plays an important role in ganking freighters. ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/706 "2018-08-23T20:06:19Z")
But again, we are not complaining about ganks (suicide or other) but about the bumping that is used to effectively prevent a target from warping off until the suicide squad is ready, THUS circumventing concord reaction. ---
**Author:** ![Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/siegfried_cohenberg/32/423311_2.png) [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Siegfried_Cohenberg)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/707 "2018-08-23T20:06:44Z")
> [@Anderson\_Geten](#): > > THUS circumventing concord reaction. well it doesnt do any damage so why would it cause any concord reaction ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/708 "2018-08-23T20:07:54Z")
this is not an argument. ---
**Author:** ![Dom\_Arkaral](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dom_arkaral/32/462611_2.png) [@Dom\_Arkaral](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dom_Arkaral)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:16pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/709 "2018-08-23T20:16:22Z")
It is > [@Anderson\_Geten](#): > > THUS circumventing concord reaction. And no Gankers still die. 😂 And the bumper isnt agressing anyone (feelings don’t count) ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/710 "2018-08-23T20:46:02Z")
How comes I say “bumper circumvents concord reaction” and you say “no because gankers still die” and you expect me to not call you an idiot ? we said already that the topic is not about ganking, but about bumping. It’s even in the title. If it’s impossible for you to accept that, I think you should not post anymore, you will only have stupid answers completely out of the topic. ---
**Author:** ![Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/siegfried_cohenberg/32/423311_2.png) [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Siegfried_Cohenberg)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/711 "2018-08-23T20:53:14Z")
> [@Castiel351](#): > > 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? If the gankers have unlimited time to form, the hauler has just as much time to form their own fleet. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Voidstar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mike_voidstar/32/280496_2.png) [@Mike\_Voidstar](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Mike_Voidstar)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/712 "2018-08-23T20:56:40Z")
Other things that do no damage: Scramblers— yet still concorded even if offset by WCS Disruptors— yet still concorded even if offset by WCS Webs— yet still concorded even if ship not moving ECM— yet still concorded effective or not due to RNG Tracking Disruptor— yet still concorded even if ship has no guns Sensor Dampener— Yet still concorded even if ship isn’t trying to lock anything. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Voidstar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mike_voidstar/32/280496_2.png) [@Mike\_Voidstar](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Mike_Voidstar)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 8:57pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/713 "2018-08-23T20:57:35Z")
> [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](#): > > If the gankers have unlimited time to form, the hauler has just as much time to form their own fleet. Yes. The proposed solution provides a way for that fleet to be effective without having to suicide in self defense against aggression in high sec. ---
**Author:** ![Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/siegfried_cohenberg/32/423311_2.png) [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Siegfried_Cohenberg)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 9:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/714 "2018-08-23T21:23:43Z")
> [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Yes. The proposed solution provides a way for that fleet to be effective without having to suicide in self defense against aggression in high sec. The fleet doesnt need to suicide in self defense. But if the fleet did suicide in self defense, that freighter is basically free, and the next time the two parties meet, that bumper won’t be as eager. ---
**Author:** ![Solstice\_Projekt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solstice_projekt/32/503293_2.png) [@Solstice\_Projekt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solstice_Projekt)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2018, 10:29pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/715 "2018-08-23T22:29:32Z")
Guys. Remember that you automatically lose when you let them pull you into arguing about their ■■■■■■■■. You know they’re wrong and they don’t care if they’re wrong, because that isn’t of any concern to them. You are in a disadvantage when you assume that they care just because you care. You are in the disadvantage when you argue around about stuff that’s not worth discussing. There are always some fundamental things they know they are wrong about, but they keep talking about so much ■■■■■■■■ that such important details usually are not being considered anymore. In 99% of all cases there is nothing to talk about, and talking is the only thing they can … and that’s why they keep doing it. They don’t care about the game. They want to be right. They want to get rid of us. They will never stop. Remember your EVE history, guys, and hammer into your head that there are way more important people we should be dealing with and talking with. These guys here ( \*_points at the above\*_ ) should be of zero concern to any of us. ---
**Author:** ![DrysonBennington](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/drysonbennington/32/501369_2.png) [@DrysonBennington](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/DrysonBennington)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2018, 1:41am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/716 "2018-08-24T01:41:22Z")
The 3 minute warp timer would be an excellent balance to High Sec Bumping. ---
**Author:** ![Vuhdo\_Rin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/vuhdo_rin/32/378868_2.png) [@Vuhdo\_Rin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Vuhdo_Rin)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2018, 3:44am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/717 "2018-08-24T03:44:21Z")
Simply no ---
**Author:** ![Castiel351](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/castiel351/32/89011_2.png) [@Castiel351](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Castiel351)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2018, 6:05pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/718 "2018-08-24T18:05:53Z")
Sorry I dont play the special snowflake card and selectively choose to clip statements other people make to reformat the context of the OP becuase I dont lack the ability to form an cogent opinion. The only point you made is how bad you are at being a forum troll. ---
**Author:** ![Castiel351](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/castiel351/32/89011_2.png) [@Castiel351](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Castiel351)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2018, 6:09pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/719 "2018-08-24T18:09:59Z")
I concur with Vuhdo\_Rin. As the op, there is literally no point in keeping this post open any longer it’s nothing but neckbeard wearing parent basement dwelling forum trolls who spend 24 hours a day posting how they are right and everyone else is wrong. Seriously 80% of this thread is worthless special snowflake trash. ---
**Author:** ![Teckos\_Pech](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/teckos_pech/32/375283_2.png) [@Teckos\_Pech](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Teckos_Pech)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2018, 3:53am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/720 "2018-08-26T03:53:29Z")
> [@Anderson\_Geten](#): > > Only if you’re saying “It’s an activity I’m doing so it’s fine”. > And at the same time trolling people who affirm there is an issue. But that goes without effort for you. \ I’m not a bumper. ---
**Author:** ![Teckos\_Pech](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/teckos_pech/32/375283_2.png) [@Teckos\_Pech](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Teckos_Pech)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2018, 4:09am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/721 "2018-08-26T04:09:29Z")
> [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Teckos things anything is fine, so long as his opposition explodes. He isn’t the slightest bit interested in balance, he is only moved by the Goon Party line, no matter how ridiculous or unsupported. Coming from you this is rich. Has my position changed in the slightest regarding AFK cloaking since I joined Amok./GSF? > [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](#): > > Theres nothing imbalanced at all about a very tiny portion of the playerbase killing freighters. I think this should be, “Theres nothing imbalanced at all about a very tiny portion of the playerbase killing imprudent and irresponsible freighter pilots.” 🕶 > [@Siegfried\_Cohenberg](#): > > well it doesnt do any damage so why would it cause any concord reaction Nor does it interfere with the functioning of any ship systems. > [@Anderson\_Geten](#): > > this is not an argument. Actually it is. Scrams and disrupters interfere with the operation of a ship’s warp drives. Webs interfere with the sub-light drives. Tracking disrupters, ECM, Sensor Damps, etc. all interfere with a ship’s system. Bumping does not interfere with any ship’s systems. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Scramblers— yet still concorded even if offset by WCS The stop the warp engines from working. Stop them. Even if aligned and at 75% or more speed they won’t work. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Disruptors— yet still concorded even if offset by WCS See the above. These can also inhibit MJDs as well. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Webs— yet still concorded even if ship not moving Prevent the sub-light drives working as they should. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > ECM— yet still concorded effective or not due to RNG Prevent targeting/break target locks. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Tracking Disruptor— yet still concorded even if ship has no guns Disrupt the traking system of a ship. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Sensor Dampener— Yet still concorded even if ship isn’t trying to lock anything. Reduce the efficacy of the sensors and either the targeting range and/or lock time. In short, all of these interfere with how the ship works. Bumping does not interfere with any of these systems. What it does is knock a ship off of it’s alignment trajectory. But no ship systems are prevented from working as they should. This is why a bumped ship can warp to an interceptor that burns 150+ KM in front of it. > [@Mike\_Voidstar](#): > > Yes. The proposed solution provides a way for that fleet to be effective without having to suicide in self defense against aggression in high sec. You have screwed up not once, but several times. If suiciding a fleet is necessary to get you out of that jam that seems reasonable. > [@Castiel351](#): > > Sorry I dont play the special snowflake card and selectively choose to clip statements other people make to reformat the context of the OP becuase I dont lack the ability to form an cogent opinion. The only point you made is how bad you are at being a forum troll. Grow up. Your entire comment can be seen in my post by simply clicking on the little down arrow. In fact, by clicking on my avatar in your response I could see my last post to you, and your replies. > [@Castiel351](#): > > …nothing but neckbeard wearing parent basement dwelling forum trolls who spend 24 hours a day posting how they are right and everyone else is wrong. Projection much? ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2018, 12:05pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/722 "2018-08-26T12:05:05Z")
> [@Teckos\_Pech](#): > > I’m not a bumper. It’s fine for you. I often find myself being bumper, eg at jita undock - I don’t feel ashamed . Please read the context before quoting my (previous) post . > [@Teckos\_Pech](#): > > Actually it is. Scrams and disrupters interfere with the operation of a ship’s warp drives. Webs interfere with the sub-light drives. Tracking disrupters, ECM, Sensor Damps, etc. all interfere with a ship’s system. Bumping does not interfere with any ship’s systems. actually it still is completely out of context. We are talking about mechanism, not about lore. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Voidstar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mike_voidstar/32/280496_2.png) [@Mike\_Voidstar](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Mike_Voidstar)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 2:50am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363/723 "2018-08-27T02:50:39Z")
Not only are we talking about mechanics, which he steadfastly refuses to do, He missed or decided to ignore the point. Points are still considered aggressive and suffer concord **Even when offset by WCS** , as in the points did nothing at all. The same for all the other non damaging things I listed, all of which are still concorded even when circumstances render them completely ineffectual. The argument that bumping does nothing does not hold water. Lots of things that technically do nothing are concorded. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363.md?page=35) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/balancing-hi-sec-freighter-bump-mechanics/95363.md?page=37)