Balancing Hi-Sec Freighter Bump Mechanics

I’d also be willing to discuss a ‘beneficial’ module that lowered the mass of the targeted ship to the point that it just can’t bump anything, though that might result in hilarity and ships that now take forever to align or something because of how the math on that works.

Or a Module that increased another ships align time, meaning that the more of them you bring, the faster the targeted ship can align making the bumping itself much more difficult to sustain.

So?

And they could try reps? Granted that just delays things but it could buy more time for counter bumping. Also try having a ceptor burn ahead in the direction of the bumping to provide a point for the freighter to warp to.

And ganking the bumping ship is valid and reasonable. The freighter pilot was serially stupid, so getting out of that mess of stupid requiring a substantial sacrifice strikes me as quite reasonable.

No it is not the argument. If your argument is seen as valid then CCP can declare excessive bumping an exploit. No need for a module.

And yes with the module it becomes easier to get away with stupid.

It balances the stupid.

For the Hauler, stupid was defined as flying without escort present.

We can equally define stupid as bumping without a gank fleet present.

We aren’t discussing how to fight a gank, we are discussing Bump Mechanics. Once the gank fleet is present we are outside the scope of the complaint and discussion. You are still trying to deflect to a strawman.

A bit more reasonable, though still very much in the realm of the lucky bump and easily prevented by the bumper.

You need a little more straw over there? No one is arguing it isn’t.

Yes. That’s the argument. You just don’t want to address it.

Stupid does not need balancing. EVE players are very good at imposing consequences on stupid. As for the gank fleet not being in system every time a bumper starts bumping that is not stupid for reasons already explained.

No. This is an on going dynamic process you want to chop up because it suits your argument but that is actually nonsense. When looking at the whole process there isn’t an issue with bumping.

Actually for the bumper to counter this he will need to chang the direction of the bump which can create an opening for a webber.

Does it require luck? Sure. But so what. Chances are if you are getting bumped in a freighter you made a number of stupid decisions. You clearly have a mindset that it should be easier to get out of the consequences of those stupid decisions.

You literally did argue it was unreasonable in a response to Scipio.

1 Like

I argue that Suicide in self defense is not reasonable.

Happy to kill the bumper if we can find a way to stick a criminal flag to him.

Honestly, if there’s that much value in the ship you are not wrong… But it’s not in keeping with what High Sec aggression is supposed to be like.

In this case it does, because if one side needs a fleet then so does the other. If one side can have every other fleetmate afk eating dinner several jumps away, so can the other.

Apples and Apples man.

Having to suicide a freighter because it’s hiding in an NPC corp isn’t reasonable either, yet here we are…

1 Like

Except that’s Exactly the intent behind High Security Space.

You want to kill Freighters without Concord intervention, Go to Low Sec.

The price that haulers pay for that is increased trip times and bottlenecks through areas where you can easily suicide them.

You want to kill bumpers without Concord intervention? Go to low/null sec. Works both ways…

1 Like

Except that’s not in keeping with High Sec mechanics.

You are using a loophole to initiate aggression without limitations.

Aggression is fine. Unlimited aggression is not. One of those limitations is a finite timespan on hostilities outside of a few special circumstances like wardec or suspect flagging.

You may as well start a topic requesting the removal of high sec space from the game, because that’s what your inane little soundbite amounts to.

Have you ever looked at ganked freighter killmails?

/sigh…

Again. yet Again. Oh yes again. For the Love of God AGAIN…

We aren’t talking about ganks. We are talking about bumping mechanics.

Using your logic, players in NPC corps are using a loophole to permanently avoid being a legal target in high sec, which is not in keeping with the base concept of EVE gameplay, which is being subject to PvP at any place at any time…

2 Likes

You keep ignoring why people use bumping. You want to ignore the serial stupidity because it really undermines your position.

I agree 100% that unsupported freighters are flying stupid and deserve to pop.

I also support the rule set that exists in high sec, intended to limit aggression in a number of ways.

In this case, we aren’t talking about what happens when an idiot comes up against a gank fleet.

We are talking about what happens when the gank fleet isn’t there in a reasonable time frame, which makes the bumper the idiot.

Bumping isn’t only used for ganks, but of course you already know that. I tell you what, you either convince CCP to finally get rid of mining bot fleets, or personally loan me my own 400 ship gank fleet, then we can talk about changes to bump mechanics…

This has very little, if anything, to do with the conversation.

Being kept from an asteroid is not the same as being kept from warping. One is annoying, the other is tackle.

Mining and ratting bot fleets are a thousand times more of a problem than some random bumper harassing a freighter…

again, bumping is not tackling

tackling requires a web, scram, point, bubble or anything similar

Also already illegal. If you can prove it’s a bot report it and get it removed.

Don’t pretend to be the Paladin while you stand waiting to pillage.