Nothing stops a pilot from using any, or all, of these ways of interfering with warp-off. The bumping tactic is used in addition to these other methods. Bumping is just another tool in a pilots toolbox. The tactic has its specialized use, just like most toolboxes have wrenches in various diameters AND an adjustable wrench. Sometimes the specific wrench is better, sometimes you’d rather use the adjustable one.
Again, having more tools does not make the other tools worthless or of less value. They all shine when used in their specialized areas.
–Gadget should reorganize her toolbox - it needs a dusting.
Come now. Entering was warp 100% intended to be dependent on achieving a sufficient movement vector towards your destination. That isn’t in dispute. And yes, we can change it, and I am keeping a very open-mind about this, but you haven’t be able to give me a single reason why.
Is it because they are redundant then? If that is the case, what problem is that causing? Redundancy isn’t generally considered a problem - it often is built into things to make them more robust - so what problem is this redundancy causing?
Because it costs developer time and resources. It might break things. It could alter game balance around the capital ships that are susceptible to bumping that might then require additional developer resources to fix. There are many reasons to not touch something and leave it be.
You are the one proposing taking these risks and paying these costs to change the current way the physics around warp work. And I haven’t heard one reason why the game would be better if your change was made.
I agree, CCP could have implemented things your way, or one of a hundred others, but they didn’t. They choose this system and while I am not at all adverse to change, you have to be able to justify why we should change things from the status quo other than because “it should be this way”.
I agree, it doesn’t need to be this way, but it is. I disagree though that it encroaching on the turf of the tackle modules - bumping is useless against 95% of ships in the game.
Ok, I think that is close to a reason I will get out of you, and it is one that any reasonable person can see is completely flawed. I’ll stop here.
That would all depend on the game design reasons that CCP chose the current conditions for alignment.
So unless you know why that decision was made, you can’t know whether there is any impediment or not.
It would certainly change things in the game totally unrelated to bumping, especially to the ability to tackle ships in PvP, which would reach align to warp faster if trying to escape.
So to keep the status quo for all other situations, this would need to be accompanied by changes to every ships agility, which would then negate the effect of relaxing the alignment conditions.
That all seems like a lot of work for no real change in the end, otherwise it’s a change with a whole lot of other impacts, totally unnecessary for the game.
However, if you know why CCP chose the current alignment conditions, then you might be able to discuss whether changing it has any impediment or not.
Until then, we can only look at all of the other impacts and ask why?
There are other unnecessary impacts of this that would need much broader balancing to compensate for.
As Gadget wrote way up the thread, the best approach, if any change is needed, is to just introduce the time limit to bumping, though CCP seem to have dropped that idea to, for a reason not articulated.
That is a change that doesn’t impact a whole lot of areas that your proposal does, but even there, there must be a reason CCP hasn’t done it like they orginally indicated they would.
I already wrote one above. This allows ships to reach alignment faster and would need changes to agility for allships to keep the status quo.
For example, ships already moving at speed are limited by agility in reaching alignment. They would reach alignment faster with this approach and be able to escape from PvP easier. So this change will impact tackling in a tonne of PvP situations.
This is where wider rebalancing would be required, to compensate for this change, to keep the status quo everywhere else, so even your suggestion would have 0 impact in the end.
Instead of a broad spectrum approach like this, the targeted approach of the time limit is much better (if needed at all, which it isn’t in my opinion). However even there, there must be a reason CCP hasn’t implemented it yet, that we are not aware of in the playerbase.
That’s part of the disadvantage of broad spectrum changes, that affect everything. They aren’t limited to only affecting the one issue. The impacts are much wider.
This is also why a good, targeted change is usually much better, but even then, there is a history in the game of unexpected consequences.
Salvoooo don’t type yet. Read his reply 4 times over before typing. Let’s make sure you understand this. If you want I will gladly read it out loud to you.