Deep sigh. NOW they tell me what an Omen is good for. After all these years. Well, CCP, you can’t nerf bumping now. I need to try this out 
1 Like
You too can chill. The idea won’t happen. Black Pedro said it was impossible, right? Relax. You are going to give yourself an aneurism with worry. None of these ideas will happen. So rather than be a crybaby on the forums, with just a little bit of effort you could walk away and let people talk and imagine.
Or is the trolling that irresistable?
Nice dude! Of course everyone is all worked up and bothered except you, right? Just saying that maybe instead of arguing that you ought to listen to people with more experience using and abusing game mechanics than you.
You are totally free to voice your opinion on a change or a mechanic but there are experienced people that have used mechanics on both sides of this “issue” and been successful.
I do enjoy being sarcastic, yes. So dream and drool all you want over a bland and 100% safe Highsec (because let’s be honest this is another example of CCP just one more change and I’ll be happy).
@ the OP I’ll give you one hot tip and then we can close this thread because a reasonable counter has been presented… MJD.
For structure bashes maybe you MJD around the structure and build a doctrine around countering what the enemy is doing? Even without fleetwarping maybe you can prep the grid with bookmarks that you align the fleet to and avoid the bumpers?
For traveling and not having a ship or two left behind due to bumps… MJD. Jump the fleet through the gate, have everyone everyone MJD, then continue fleetwarping until you arrive successfully.
Being a career bumper whose been successful at bump tackling war targets, bumping for gank fleets, bumping to scare people into dueling an alt, bumping a titan off a fortizar… I am confident in my ability to theorycraft a way for people on the other side. In fact I myself have been subject to having my freighter continuously bumped as well as been subjected to the very uses that people complain of here in this thread… the key is to be smart, come up with a counter, then counter their counter. It’s a game of chess man and the game keeps evolving.
You never did answer me about your sub-system training… do you need a skill injector? My SP farm should be popping a few out soon that I could sell you.
1 Like
thank you for conceding you are only arguing for the sake of your own agenda.
2 Likes
That wasn’t the point in mentioning the above. It was meant to convey that someone that actually has extensive experience in the area is talking and maybe you ought to listen instead of an endless cycle of whining.
Yes, I’d love to see bumping reinstated to the glory days of old but at the same time concede there were some issues… I also think that most things players whine about can be countered with just more knowledge, experience, and effort instead of whining to CCP.
So yes, you ought to listen to the career bumper. Thank you for displaying your out right ignorance to listen to any shred of reason. I mean why would you, the lot of you here endlessly whine and complain for your own agenda?
2 Likes
But that’s actually what it meant.
Your goal is not to make the game balanced, but to make YOUR game beneficial even at the price of the game balance.
Because it’s a fact that bumping IS a design bug. The design is that concord punishes players who take offensive actions toward other players in HS. Bumping allow players to take offensive actions without being punished.
You are dodging the issue by claiming that YOUR gameplay is more important than the balance of the game. and then you make aggressive posts because people don’t agree with you.
But you are wrong.
2 Likes
No, but thanks for speaking for me.
Bumping is often a pre-cursor to something else happening… a gank or some other tidbit of player interaction. I’m here honestly saying that there’s about counter play that bumping should mostly be a non-issue to the initiated.
So yes if I were stupid or lazy bumping might be a problem I’d complain about. Intended use of mechanics or bug it doesn’t matter to me because I’m smart enough to not see the unintended use of mechanics as an issue. Why? Because I’m smart enough to think of a counter and initiated enough to see that counter played out.
Do you fight this hard for CCP to nerf the cloak MWD that is most commonly used by DSTs but 100% capable of being used even in a battleship? Should we cry to CCP about every open-ended mechanic even though you’ve not reasonably tried to counter but instead choose to cry? Lol man this is gold here.
1 Like
But yes.
You are just dodging the point. Bumping is a design bug.
Unrelated.
Again, you are dodging the point. Whether or not people fight for other things is irrelevant to bumping being a design bug.
If you want to physically (in the game engine) interfere with other people activity, you should need to have a concord right or get punished.
2 Likes
My point is very valid… do you fight to repair all design bugs or just the ones that YOU find unfavorable? It’s very valid because you’re putting on display just how selfish you really are.
Like I said before I’d love to have old bumping back but concede there were flaws and can see the argument in change.
You on the other hand are just being ignorant… blindly brigading that every use of mechanics deemed undesirable by you gets attention.
1 Like
That’s an ad hominem, AKA personal attack.
That is, an invalid point. So no, your point is invalid, by the simple fact that it is off topic.
2 Likes
LOL a personal attack? I’ve simply asked you one question about your take on players using mechanics in unintended ways… and you think it’s an attack. This is just silly now…
——
Well you’ve presented your “reasoning” and I’ve presented mine. I think that there’s a sufficient methods for a player to counter and prevent and that bumping adds valuable content to the game.
You seem to not think that players should even have to deal with unintended uses of mechanics all while dodging the question about unintended uses of mechanics that favor you.
The lines are drawn in the sand and we’ve said our pieces. You’ve shown your bias as I’ve made mine known. I prefer a game of meaningful decisions with counters and you do not. It’s ok though, but I feel it’s time to move on. I would hate to post something that’s not a personal attack and you take it as a personal attack (lol).
1 Like
No, you made an argument based on the person while the person as not the topic. Which is the definition of a personal attack.
No you have not. You presented your opinion, that is, that you are using it so it’s balanced ; which is just absurd. You dodged all the points made and just kept repeating that your own personal taste is more important that a consistent game design.
You also kept making personal attacks and justified them by you feeling entitled to have your own gameplay even if it is unbalanced.
2 Likes
Robo…
Just stop.
This is a normal thread for Geten. He basically derails every threads he start posting in into complete nonsense. Have a look at his thread activity to see.
The trick is to just ignore him.
2 Likes
I presented reasonable counters as an excuse for CCP to not change it.
I then asked a deeper question that fundamentally changes how CCP develops and handles this game. Do you only fight to change unintended uses of mechanics that you deem unsavory, or do you fight to have all loopholes closed and unintended uses patched up?
This isn’t directed personally to you but to everyone here when using “bug” or “unintended use of mechanics” as a reason to change something. Are we all prepared to have CCP change the way they develop to game because currently they take ideas and toss them into the game without thinking of the many ways players will use and abuse it. Even after being warned of how players will use a mechanic or feature CCP chooses to let it play out for years sometimes.
So I ask this because the cloak mwd trick that people use on DSTs IS a bug and is unintended… but would you be prepared to have that fixed just because it’s a bug?
I don’t think it’s reasonable to demand that CCP only fix bugs that people dislike while wanting to preserve bugs that benefit them. I say we continue the route that CCP has clearly shown to favor which is develop something, let the players figure it out, then intercede only when it gets cancerous enough. I say there’s enough counter where bumping isn’t so bad. To the uninitiated you may think differently.
1 Like
Yeah I’ve said what I came to say. Not much more other than devolving into a pissing match. 
It is still a personal attack. You are still dodging the points made and instead relying on personal attacks. Just because you are attacking a group and not a specific person does not make it less a personal attack.
Your whole arguments are JUST personal attacks, with insults in them. You are completely dodging the points made, with invalid arguments.
You are dodging the point, that is not about the person, by claiming something about the person, then that is a personal attack. It’s the definition. All the “but you” are personal attacks, and as such invalid - unless the person was already the topic.
1 Like
I’ll start off by saying I’ve never bumped in my life. I’ve been bumped a hell of a lot, whether it’s my orca, bowhead, obelisk, etc. I personally dislike the tactic, no matter what the scenario is.
I find myself agreeing with R0B0 and Kane. Ganking is a valid tactic, and playing the game in a meta way is fully approved and even encouraged by CCP. If you want to take a look at neut alts bumping, why not also take a look at spy alts, or disbanding of a massive alliance by a single person, or any number of meta actions you can take in this game.
As R0B0 mentioned, there are a huge number of things you can do to counter bumpers, for example, AB or MWB orbit instead of sitting still. As for the gate scenario, warp all your ships but the logi, then warp logi once everyone is gone.
Really, the only response here can be “get good”. You’ve taken certain liberties with your tactics, whether it’s from laziness or plain ignorance, which have led to you being open from certain countermeasures.
1 Like
So are Armageddons and Ragnaroks.
Oh. Maybe you shouldn’t chime in then?
Not all changes are good. Not all progress is in a positive direction.
Yeah and your suggestion is bad. It’s been suggested for over a decade.
mmmm salty.
1 Like
The only way I could see suspect flagging working for bumping is if it was based on a correlation between the bumping ship’s mass and velocity. Thus small ships would have to go faster to get a flag, and larger ships wouldn’t have to go nearly as fast.
This would eliminate accidental suspect flagging at undocks and would require someone to deliberately bump at speed to go yellow. For further security, if someone’s safety is on green, they would only bump themselves and all other ship’s would be treated as LCOs.
All that being said, I don’t have a horse in this race and can’t say if this idea would be beneficial or damaging to game. To be honest, I really don’t care, just putting forth an idea for the sake of discussion.
The low intellect of that response is too stark for me to read further or reply to you further here. You are the one that “chimed in” with a non-specific, bland and empty claim that bumping was already nerfed. People don’t need to know every last god damned detail to be constructive in a discussion. But I sure would like to make intellect an actionable threshold. Jeez.