Gankers and freighters, a request for discussion. Not a BJ RANT

Please keep illustrating as I don’t see your point yet.

While I haven’t been bumped by an NPC to my recollection, I have been prevented from entering warp by myself bumping into an object and being unable to align. This whole collision mechanic gives a sense of being in a shared physical universe and provides some consequences to our positions and movement vectors in space.

I can see why CCP made that choice back then, and I can see how that has shaped certain aspects of the game including for large capital ships. What I can’t see is what the issue is that has you demanding CCP reverse that decision. I don’t see why things shouldn’t be the way they currently are.

So please, can you tell me how you think the game would be better without the alignment-influencing-warp mechanic? What benefits would we all realize if CCP did as you suggest, spent the time and removed it?

Throw me a bone here. Is it too confusing to have multiple ways to interfere with the warp process? Because that is the only shadow of a reason I can see of how you think the game would actually be better if CCP rewrote the warp mechanics to disallow bumping from your posts.

2 Likes

It already is what it does.

2 Likes

What if several ships in a PvE encounter simply kept bumping you to prevent you warping off?

Would that not have the same effect as a point?

Ofc, what is, is.
The point here, is that what is, shouldn’t be, and should be changed.

Is there something wrong with me keeping a freighter bumped for 4 hours while I wait for my ganking buddies to get off of work?

Oopsie! :monkey:

1 Like

Yes.
There is a lot wrong with that, and it speaks to the superfluous effect of bumping as fking with warping.

Why dont you point them instead for 4hrs.

1 Like

If all they are doing is bumping, they can’t prevent you warping.

Bumping does not prevent warping. You can still warp.

Bumping affects the time required to be aligned to a specific warp point, but it doesn’t prevent warping, and if you change your warp point, you can instantly warp somewhere else in that case.

3 Likes

So bumping shouldn’t just displace a ship?

Why the sudden change of view?

2 Likes

Lol.
You’ve now achieved a level of hair-splitting that even current science cant achieve.

Ofc bumping prevents warping.
That’s the superfluous reason why many people bump, aside from displacement as the primary.

1 Like

@Salvos_Rhoska
If bumping 100% prevents warping (aka tackling), how do frigates still manage to warpif they’re being bumped? :thinking:

1 Like

Wat.

It should only displace the ship.
No other effects on its operation or actions.

I guess. Bumping affects different ships differently than a point, and has a different set of counters, but if you mean not letting me warp off in the general sense then yes.

I see that. I acknowledge that bumping can affect when people enter warp. It was intended to do that. I still don’t see why you would want to spend developer resources to remove the game play around this aspect of navigation when it would be simpler to let their original design decisions stand.

Again, what problem is this causing? Are the new NPCs bumping players and you think they are OP? I really am at a loss at how you envision the game would be better without the gameplay around alignment and warp.

1 Like

No it doesn’t.

A ship can still warp if bumped. It is not prevented from doing so.

The only affect of bumping is to displace a ship and that changes the time to align, but no warp is prevented, and some warps are even assisted.

Tackling prevents warp by stopping the warp drive from even being engaged. That’s tackling. No warp is possible.

Bumping has no such effect. It only affects align time towards some warp points, but doesn’t prevent a warp. Warp is still totally possible and can even be quicker than it otherwise would be.

2 Likes

That is far from certain.
And even if it was, many intended elements in EVE have been changed afterwards.

Why not?
As above, CCP developers change previous iterations all the time.

Its defuncting use of scram/disruptor/bubble, which are the legitimate warp disablers.

A ship collision is just a bump and displacement. It does not need to overlap with these dedicated modules for purposes of interfering with warping.

Which is why I proposed widening the cone towards the warp destination.

Scram/disruptor/bubble will be totally unaffected.

I’m a content creator though. I can’t have all the fun for myself. I’m a generous person and I want to share the fun with my friends. How selfish of you to want to limit the extent of my content sharing.

1 Like

Everyone is a content creator in EVE.

4 Likes

This is a really good example of you demonstrating how you have not the slightest idea of the game.

I’m not sure what you try to achieve here, but my guess is you have too much time and just like to talk in circles and pretend to not understand a single argument against your position.

Get a job

1 Like

-1 on that and luckily, I can’t see CCP ever doing it.

However, surely you see that this by defInition means bumping does not prevent warp. Ships can still warp while bumped.

3 Likes