Does not work if you’re targeted. “Normal” log-off works with the known drawbacks.
As a former freighter pilot, i got ganked, not by guys 30 jumps deep in dullsec but by guys ready to go in-system. It isnt the death that is the issue it is either:
-
suicide your ship and cost your gankers no ships at all.
-
being bumped continuously for 30 mins hundreds of Kms off gate because the gank fleet is 30 jumps deep in dullsec and has to cepter to the gank.
Neither of these options is interesting game play for the person being bumped. I had no issue with my freighter loss (and this was before i became space rich). It was done quickly an professionally with a minimal amount of bumping, not minutes but only a few seconds (they had tracked me and were almost ready even before i arrived in-system).
perhaps my suggested 2 mins time is not enough but 30 mins is far too long and needs some kind of fix.
Time doesn’t matter at all.
If it took them 30 minutes it was 30 minutes that could also be used to bring up help. It takes one other ship to bump the bumper.
- Neither of these is a solution: the reason freighters generally get ganked isnt for the giggles it is because the gankers have done the math and determined that the profit is high enough to warrant ganking the freighter.
Counter to this scenario is having to pay someone to follow you around space webbing you, finding someone that will even do it, and wondering all the while whether said person is just ‘webbing’ you into a trap (not an issue i find objectionable). The short of what could be a long discussion on basic economics is that gankers have economics on their side and freighter pilot incomes are low enough that paying two people to freight stuff makes no economic sense (or we would see nearly all freighter pilots having paid web escorts, even services would develop around people signing up to be web buddies) but the economics are not there and hence it doesnt happen to any significant degree, hence this is no realistic solution to extended bumping.
- The game simply should not be balanced around having an alt, it is not a fair way to form a game where having ‘alts’ is required to play. Game balance should be around playing one avatar and doing things as such.
Of course time matters. It’s bad design if you have a 30 minute stalemate where both sides have to try to arrange some kind of escalation. That’s boring as hell and rewards gankers who aren’t really prepared to engage a target.
1 Like
This like the previous post i made comes down to economics, it is not economical for ‘savior’ groups to be formed or there would be ‘saviors’ lining up to do the job.
There are some savior groups that operate, to a very limited degree, outside of an economic motive but economically it doesnt work, you either alt (not a good way to balance a game that doesn’t require them) or you get bumped for 30 mins, or you suicide.
None of these options are acceptable and I think CCP is starting to see bumping as too much of a good thing.
1 v 1 stalemates are common and normal in many games.
Saviors? It takes 1 alt in a heavy ship to counter a bumper.
I think CCP likes 2nd accounts 
- It isn’t even economically viable to have a single person counter bump a bumper, that is why counter bumping services don’t exist. Even if you start playing an alt to bump, the bumpers just get more bump ships, this i know from personal experience, i started bumping to save a guy and a second mach was on scene before i could completely disengage the first one and before the ship died a third mach was on scene just in case i had friends.
Agreed, and i have an alt account because of the benefit of having one comes up frequently but balancing a game around having an alt is horrible game balancing strategy.
The alt is an alternative, Friendship is the best Ship right? 
Being common does not make it good design.
1 Like
It is not by choice, in an MMO where many different classes of ship exist you cannot balance around 1v1, it is a fools errand.
And in pretty much all those games where stalemates are common both sides have the option to disengage in a non suicidal way. Which is not true in EVE.
Of course you can balance it. You can’t eliminate it 100%, but you have things like limited ammunition/capacitor charges/etc. For example, two actively tanked ships capable of completely tanking the incoming DPS are almost certainly actively tanked and burning cap charges to keep their tank going. Eventually someone is going to run out of cap and lose the fight. Or in a gate/station fight someone is going to wait out their aggro timer and jump/dock to end the fight. In the case of bumping a warp-out timer achieves the goal of preventing extended stalemates without removing the ability to use bumping as a short-term tactic to win a fight.
Yeah, using points.
Awesome! we agree then, to hold someone on grid you should have to point them.
So you’re saying it ok that the only way to hold someone on grid is using a point? GOTCHA.
2 Likes
No, using any means necessary as the game mechanics allow.
That includes points, scrams, bumping and keeping ones cap dry.
Game mechanics say you’re wrong, and CCP says you’re wrong, because if you were right they wouldn’t allow people to prevent warps with anything but points or sucking cap.
CCP dictates what is, and isn’t allowed. Not you. As CCP doesn’t give a ■■■■ about people whining about bumping, I am absolutely sure you can figure out what that tells you about your complaints.
1 Like
… and game mechanics have never been changed in the history of EVE.
What I’m saying is, yes, CCP dictates what is and isn’t allowed. And they have changed mechanics in the past and they will keep changing things.
I did not propose a timer but a cumulative widening of the “warp entry tolerance vector”, which would over time make it harder to keep your target on grid, as it would be become easier to enter warp, while still requiring the pilot not to be afk.
And suicide scrams could at least be attacked without flagging the saviour. So trying to “save” a freighter from a “bump in progress” is not as suicidal as it is now. Anti-Ganking is not a widespread thing, in part because they would take serious hits to their security standings if they would do the sensible thing and attack suicide gankers before they get flashy.
Counter-Bumping requires the counter-bumper to be better at bumping than the bumper himself, so as it is there is really not much a freighter being bumped can do.
At least give him a fast hard lesson on due diligence and gank the freighter fast instead of kicking it around for thousands of km.
Freighters can be killed pretty fast and cheap if the gankers are prepared. And I feel it should be that way.
I keep reading that people believe they’re entitled to declaring what is, and isn’t, an acceptable timeframe for gankers to bump the target. The same people seem to be entitled to declare how close that gank-fleet has to be, and that the players can not do anything else in the mean-time.
I recently saw someone bumping miners, which I had not seen before, and it caused me to reconsider my position on this.
I think it is over the top because in essentially a 1v1 activity the miner has no counter to the bumper. With freighters I never felt that it mattered because in my mind the freighter should have an escort so 1v1 is a non-issue. Solo mining however is normal.
Every act should have a counter and this one has none as far as I can see?
A solo miner has no counter for being knocked off position by a significant distance.
However a realistic solution can’t just be about miners or freighters, it needs to account for all ship collisions:
- At stations undocking
- In Combat
- Freighter bumping
- Miner bumping
- Hitting fixed objects
Timers suck, if there was going to be something done it would have to be related to collision damage, and damage would need to be a factor of speed so that low speed collisions like occur outside a station do not end up being mass destruction.
The basic idea being if a fast moving ship hits a slow moving ship too many times it will be destroyed.
So like in the miner bumping where the bumper takes a running start and hits the stationary ship at high speed, the bumper would take a lot more damage than the stationary ship.
Okay then, I will.
The problem with labeling bumping as “an aggressive action” is that there is no way to tell the difference (from a purely game mechanics standpoint) between a player actively trying to interfere with another player getting into warp and two ships simply bumping into each other because they got too close. There can’t be a solution because the game client can’t definitively identify the problem.
It’s also worth noting that your statement about there being “no feasible solution” is incorrect. Bumping is only really ever an issue for solo freighter pilots. If a freighter pilot travels with scouts/webbing alts, hostile bumping is generally a non-issue. EvE isn’t a single-player game, so it shouldn’t be balanced as such.
Imagine this scenario: you have a large fleet tightly anchored on their FC. The FC gives the order to warp warp warp, and instead of aligning, the fleet all approaches the FC, gets “bumped” by a large number of other ships, and suddenly can enter warp from any direction, allowing the entire fleet to insta-warp without having been aligned first.
In other words, your feature would be abused to no end by fleets, folks at a station undock, etc.
-1
1 Like