The point I’m making is that the fact that you can align to a different location and warp is one of a few suitable counters to being bumped. This makes your change unnecessary other than you just wanting it to be this way.
While I do enjoy combating the half-hatched ideas and terrible proposals here, a warrior needs his rest. Hard to take a day off when there’s evil lurking here as is in this thread. 
Then I’m saddened that you guys protect people like that, that blatantly admit to trolling, but punish people whose threads are less spamming than this…
Bumping preventing warp does not force fights.
It merely makes point/bubbles redundant.
Currently I can bump a target indefinitely and prevent it warping with that action, without ever fighting them.
False.
Time to enter warp would remain completely unaffected in my proposal, both on bumped and non-bumped ships.
You wont get any further response from me until you address this post which you have not yet responded to:
It helps creating a lot of content
Just look at ag, they rely on bumping 100% of the time to see who’s about to die.
They rely on bumpers to get all them dank catalyst killmarks
People can still warp off if they have something in the direction their ship is going…
Also that graph of yours still doesn’t make sense, no matter how many times you post it 
E: words
That is not evidence of a problem though. People argue about freighter ganking too. Again there is no problem there from a mechanics standpoint. None. The “problem” is players taking on lots of risk and probably not realizing it. When they do realize it is when that risk bites them.
No it doesn’t. There is no ship that can use points/bubbles in highsec to keep a ship long enough for a fight to escalate. A bumper can bump a non-war target for hours. A ship that uses a point module on a non-war target explodes in 5-25 seconds freeing the target ship from tackle and allowing it to warp off and ending the fight.
You are just obstinately stating mistruths now. The two forms of tackle are not redundant, and even if they are partially redundant somehow in some situations, and that isn’t a reason to remove them anyway. The game is full of redundancies, most of their put on purpose by the developers to give players more options to do things in different ways in the sandbox.
The content that bumping creates as interfering with align/warp is hard to discern, as it doesnt show up on killboards.
In anycase, we know the volume of HS suicide ganking is very tiny, so its not an argument against my proposal of removing the align/warp interference secondary effect of bumping.
That tiny minority can just use points instead.
People are saying you’re wrong because it’s possible to reach 75% velocity before you get within 5 degrees of the warpanke object. This will put ships in a situation where they met the velocity requirement, but didn’t meet the angle requirement to now you have ships able to get into warp faster because they will have the velocity requirement and only have to make it within the much wider angle of degree. That’s the problem with this that effects other areas of the game. Does this make sense?
Here you go. Why is this counter not suitable enough for you? Is it because that despite it being a counter it’s still somehow too unfair or too hard for a player to do? Why do gankers go or of their way to achieve the same end-goal but others on the opposite end of the gun are too lazy to adapt or even take basic steps to protect themselves?
Yeah tons of people complain about bumping. I urge you to take a look at them and evaluate how valid their complaints are against how bad or lazy of a player they are.
Or that tiny minority that is effected by bumping like this can adapt and be a better player. Use the counters that are available to you? Why stifle player created content for the sake of appeasing a minority that refuses to learn how to play the game?
Ship collision (bumping) to the effect of preventing warp, makes the dedicated point modules redundant.
Ship collision (bump) will still displace the ship as is its primary, real function, but wont overlap on points.
As Ive said many times over:
If you want to displace a ship, bump it.
If you want to prevent it from warping, point/bubble it.
Bumping doesn’t prevent warp.
You wont get any further answers from me till you own the following. This is now the third time this has been put to you:
And has been repeated in rebuttal in multiple forms:
There is no standing reason that a tactic or module can’t have multiple effects.
–Re-Rebutting Gadget
Nonsense bumping is generally an inferior mode of keeping a ship on grid. Bubbles, points, scrams are far more efficient. Bumping is a niche mechanic used in freighter ganking and possibly to keep a super on grid. This complaint is trivially true.
There are lots of dumb things in EVE relative to RL. why do asteroid belts respawn? Never happens IRL.
I literally just addressed the post you’re talking about.
In case you happened to miss it I’ll do it again.
People are saying you’re wrong because it’s possible to reach 75% velocity before you get within 5 degrees of the warpanke object. This will put ships in a situation where they met the velocity requirement, but didn’t meet the angle requirement to now you have ships able to get into warp faster because they will have the velocity requirement and only have to make it within the much wider angle of degree. That’s the problem with this that effects other areas of the game. Does this make sense?
Here you go. Why is this counter not suitable enough for you? Is it because that despite it being a counter it’s still somehow too unfair or too hard for a player to do? Why do gankers go or of their way to achieve the same end-goal but others on the opposite end of the gun are too lazy to adapt or even take basic steps to protect themselves?
Yeah tons of people complain about bumping. I urge you to take a look at them and evaluate how valid their complaints are against how bad or lazy of a player they are.
Something something bumping don’t prevent warping
You claimed I was wrong about how things currently work and made several insulting posts thereafter still riding on that.
In that post I showed you I was not describing how things are, but making a proposal of how things could be.
You misread.
Address that or I will no longer respond to you.
This is the last time I’m asking.
If so, then CCP might as well implement an “anti-bump” module.
Just use a point/bubble instead.
That is a mischaracterization. They are not redundant as evident from the different rules regarding CONCORD on their use.
Why do you keep going back to this like it saves your argument? It just isn’t true nor is your oft-repeated mantra. Things are allowed to do multiple and redundant things, even in Eve.
If your fundamental premises are wrong, then likely so is the whole case you built upon it.
So many words over something there is 0% chance of CCP implementing. Maybe we should go back to arguing about a bump timer or some other alternative that actually has a tiny chance of making it into the game?
I’m not preventing you from doing so.
My proposal works, and wont effect anything except a bumped ship from aligning/warping.
