1 + 18/3 =?
18 being 15 mon crim.timer plus some extra
Basic maths mate
6 suicide point alts will not refresh the bump timer indefinitely, in those ships.
They will only enable the bump ship to interfere with align/warp of the target for 21mins, the 3 first minutes not requiring a point except at the end of its duration to refresh it.
Actual figures will differ by a few seconds, depending on how punctually you activate point on the target at the end of the 3 minute cycle, and how punctual the next bump is afterwards.
I think you need to look up what “indefinitely” means.
You are not using the term correctly.
You bump a freighter:
@2m50s suicide alt #1
@5m50s suicide alt #2
@8m50s suicide alt #3
@11m50s suicide alt #4
@14m50s suicide alt #5
It is at this point where you need a 6th suicide alt because your first suicide alt is still waiting out his criminal timer.
@17m50s suicide alt #6
These numbers are based off of landing the timing just right. Ideally you want to allow yourself enough time as a buffer to compensate for personal errors and whatnot.
This is how you keep a freighter bumped indefinitely with your 3 minute timer.
1 Like
in·def·i·nite
ˌinˈdef(ə)nət/Submit
adjective
lasting for an unknown or unstated length of time.
“they may face indefinite detention”
synonyms: indeterminate, unspecified, unlimited, unrestricted, undecided, undetermined, undefined, unfixed, unsettled, unknown, uncertain; More
I am referring to bumping the target until I feel like letting go. That could be 4 minutes or it could be 12 hours.
1 Like
No, your numbers are based off the fleet not being nearby and not having pulled its thumb out to deploy immediately, and in a doctrine that warps fast.
That’s the fleets problem, not the bump targets.
In LS/NS/WH, all you need is a bumper with a point, or a bumper without a point + 1 point ship. Those will be able to prevent the targets warp “indefinitely” (in the correct use of the term).
You are looking at this with blinders on. How you managed to “rub two brain cells together” and find the submit button is beyond me.
Suggest what you want and CCP will do what they want. Just don’t be surprised when we adapt and you still want to cry like a baby.
2 Likes
I’m not crying, bro.
Ive never been bumped, but I have bumped others.
Good job if you adapt!
Explain?
Ive answered all your questions concisely and accurately.
Maybe this is a bad idea, and even if it isn’t it’ll probably never happen, but here goes:
What if you could immoboliize a Freighter with a module but it made you go Suspect?
Not Criminal. No Concord. Just Suspect.
This eliminates the silly bumper car mechanic. This removes the immunity / impunity that comes with bumping as an immobilization mechanic.
The immobilizer can sit there blinking yellow for a long as it likes.
This now gives the Freighter pilot / escorts / friends of the Freighter pilot / passing do-gooders a chance to respond / intervene.
This takes away the argument that nothing can be done to prevent the bump, because you can shoot the immobilizer. It takes away the cheap untouchable exploit feel of bumping.
The aim here should not be (and some of the anti-gankers go too far down this route without realising it just because it’s in their favour and they are unaware of their own self bias) to ensure that every gank is a success even if it’s a gank carried out by a fleet that is not ready, with the wrong composition, etc etc.
The aim should surely be to make it so that we end up in a world where no part of a successful gank is due to cheap tricks that people can complain about?
I dunno, thinking out loud. I don’t usually do ‘what if …’ posts because it’s all a bit pointless, but hey, that’s what forums are for, right?
So remove bumping. Add something that immobilizes Freighters but makes the user go Suspect.
Thoughts?
(probably got no chance of this even being noticed now that we are back to everyone arguing with Salvos as per normal).
3 Likes
It comes off as crying because you are frantically grasping at any idea that needs something you obviously don’t like.
First it was your stupid ■■■■■■■ change in the way alignment where you kept repeating yourself after we tried explaining to you why it was a bad idea. Now you settle for considering a bump timer in which you fail to understand the balance in it all while completely ignoring that bumping largely isn’t even a problem considering the dwindling amount of ganking compared to years past.
Like how this isn’t some boner over seeing gankers and bumping get nerfed, I dunno dude.
You are willingly ignoring important parts of balance while inflating how big of an issue ganking and bumping really is. You hardly have a basic understanding of how this works while trying to do some wordy lawyering around the fact that you come off as not knowing what you’re talking about.
I mean aren’t you running for CSM? Someone had mentioned that earlier. That is really embarrassing if you are.
This fits reality better than what you typed 
3min max bump duration was CCPs idea.
BP added the notion the timer can be reset by an actual point.
I’m fine with that.
Do you not like it?
Are you crying against it?
Are you frantically grasping at nonsense around that?
Sure looks like it.
It’s not about the number you associate with it. It is to some extent, but it’s about how you personally approach this.
Look at what the watchlist removal and now sending a chat request did to hunting targets. It has all but completely killed that niche type of gameplay off because of the extent you have to go through to get it done. Is it impossible? Hardly… but it’s just so inconvenient and not worth the time to most people.
That’s what these half-hatched suggestions lead to because you have no idea what it actually takes to gank a freighter on this scale.
Confirm or deny, are you running for CSM?
This is nothing personal for me.
This was proposed by CCP, seconded by BP, and Teckos also endorsed it at an even lower 90s max bump duration.
Why are you crying so hard against it?
I am not. Not that it matters.
Changing mechanics so something is harder is a nerf. The question is then should it be nerfed. I have not seen much justification than: I don’t like it. This doesn’t mean bumping doesn’t need a nerf, but IMO “I don’t like it” is not a valid argument. The only argument I have seen is: a player should not be bumped and inordinately long time. Then what is a long time? Also, IMO, any timer under 10 minutes without a suicide point reset would require an EHP reduction. So if the justification is the “Long Time” argument we probably don’t want a suicide point.
Also be advised that emergence indicates something may…emerge that some may not like such as more alts. Especially now with alphas. This way while waiting out a timer on one alt the player can gank with another. Note I am not saying, “No, because emergence.” Just noting that it is going to be possible this will lead to something people don’t like or like even less than the status quo. What if gankers find a way to practically alpha a freighter. I could see people back here whining incessantly about “lack of counter play”. And no amount of don’t be an idiot and put yourself in that situation will convince them (probably because they were idiots who took on a shitton of risk).
I have detailed the reasons in this thread, but basically it gives too much tactical and strategic advantages, it enables people to form a fleet at their leisure, it enables them to chose their time of attack and in the best system for lowest cost, it completely enables them to control the battlespace, it enables them to stack up targets if they want to. They can move the fight away from the gate, they can keep the person there for hours, also it makes it too easy and too controlled.
Not as such, my view on EHP reduction is that if bumping was to end in totality, such as Salvos’s warp cone increase then an EHP reduction would be advisable, however these different timers which can be reset by a suicide point do not deserve a EHP reduction.
Not so much the justification, but having a mechanic then enables someone to keep a freighter locked in place for as long as he can be bothered to bump it is not great gameplay. I want to see game play based around the freighter using gate cloaks etc., to make it difficult, that people moving to different routes to avoid the gank fleet are worth doing.
Your second paragraph is bullshite hot air trying to make some obscure point, sorry…
So you like doiNG it to others, but can’t take your own medicine?
That’s cute 
And like ISD Buldath told me, if it’s on topic it doesn’t matter
Htfu
Agreed.
I dont even want to start thinking about how much complication in ship balance between use in HS/LS/NS/WH an EHP reduction would involve.
Bumps are not only applied to freighters.
If freighter EHP should be reduced, thats a completely different topic.
I removed some identical posts.
You should scroll up some more
There’s about 300 repetitive posts by our little Salvos here
1 Like
Htfu plz
1 Like