Then you are on purpose not reading the arguments that were given here already.
Bumping allows you to have the same effect as a point, without using said point and thus without having to suffer the consequences that using a point incurs.
A freighter requires less SP and isks than marauders, dreadgoughts, carriers, which are not even considered as “high end” gameplay. A freighter costs even less than a barghest (and requires less SP to fit correctly).
Calling freighters “high end gameplay” makes no sense. That’s just an arbitrary definition you use that is not backed by anything in the game and whose sole goal is to suit your opinion.
Sure, but if there is no follow on from that, it has no consequence for the freighter ultimately either. Get up, go for a walk, do the dishes, do some house work, completely AFK autopilot around highsec. If the approach here is to ignore that bumping leads to any other outcome that involves multiple characters and alts, and just argue that it’s a purely solo activity, then there is 0 risk at all to the freighter.
Alternatively though, an argument based on “alt’s are bad” has to be evenly applied to both sides. If alts are bad and we ignore them for the bumping, then the freighter is perfectly safe. If we don’t ignore them but insist they are bad, then surely we should be advocating for making freighter ganking a soloable activity. Not doing so is hypocritical.
We shouldn’t and so alts aren’t bad at all. They just provide advantages and disadvantages and it’s up to individual choice whether to use them or not. In either case, freighters aren’t singled out. Lot’s of high-end play involves alts.
No, the exact words were - “issue is when the game requires you to play with alts”.
It doesn’t, and there is no issue.
So that is irrelevant completely taken just at face value. But, the implication of the statement is that in some way, alts are bad (however you want to interpret those words, the meaning is just in a general sense that an issue is bad).
Yes, Bronson wrote fit istabs instead of expanders or tank, use a scout/webber or two and laugh at the ganker tears.
In response, you wrote that if you have a webber, there’s no need for istabs either. Gankers can’t catch you and that the issue is when the game requires you to play with alts.
It’s not hard to follow what you wrote. But this is now bordering on the pointless and almost all discussions end up unfortunately. Nothing is off topic and all within the scope of the original reply to Bronson.
If there’s an issue with alts, that approach should be applied equally to both sides. There’s no issue with alts though and lots of examples of play that benefit from them, which is purely a choice we all have.
Come on. Be consistent. You told me to go look at the context of the original discussion where you replied to Bronson.
Bronson was talking about gankers when you replied to him. It’s right in his post:
You replied to that. It was directly in response to a comment on gankers.
However, it is all related anyway, since the topic of bumping is inseparable from ganking in relation to freighters in highsec (there are other uses of bumping like extortion, but it’s most commonly associated with ganking where freighters are concerned).
This is a good example of why discussions here are pointless. Some people just ignore what they wrote before even when telling others to go read the context. Total waste of time engaging in discussion with you.
My bad. I should have stuck with the lesson learned previously.
yes it was related as the gankers who NEED bumpers can’t catch you. because bumpers can’t catch you. But gankers who don’t rely on bumpers still can -.-
Use an alt (alt game balancing is failure straight out of the gate, no matter the issue).
Paying someone else to web you is not feasible and finding someone to follow you around space for hours is going to be nearly impossible.
Form counter bumping organizations (not feasible or they would exist already in sufficient numbers that bumping would have basically come to an end already).
Niche or completely disingenuous statement that: ‘I’m a freighter pilot that does not want this issue changed’, therefore, no change is needed or similarly, ‘I know a guy that has been bumped many times and he doesn’t want perma-bumping changed’, so no change is needed.
Add some mod / rig / game mechanic that is stupidly punitive as ‘punishment’ to freighter pilots for asking for a reasonable change to a broken mechanic.
Use a scout (not feasible or depends on alt use or again having someone move around space for hours with you, which you are highly unlikely to find.).
Stop being a freighter pilot (this is an attempt to derail the conversation rather than address the discussion and in no way resolves the issue of balance between gankers and freighter pilots).
Fallacy of the slippery-slope, ‘if we give frieghter pilots a counter to perma-bumping, they will just ask for bump immunity next’.
Stay docked (over the years CCP has made it abundantly clear that ‘not playing EVE’, is not a good solution to any EVE problem).
Perma-bumping is, ‘working as intended’, since CCP worked to remove perma-bumping which makes me wonder how you came to this conclusion.
There are currently ways to counter perma-bumping (either require alts or are not feasible).
Off-Topic analogies that don’t solve the problem of perma-bumping.
Confusing a desire to end perma-bumping with a desire to end freighter bumping entirely.
Solving some unrelated problem, somehow solves the actual problem of perma-bumping.
This discussion is not in any way related to griefing, financial gain or any other player motive, it is about a mechanic that is not conducive to engaging interactions between EVE game players.
You are a solo pilot and will always lose to many pilots (does not address the problem in anyway but rather attempts to avoid the issue entirely).
Gankers put in a lot of effort and should be rewarded (absolutely agree but holding someone for 45mins is not engaging game play, especially in highsec but really any place for that matter).
Freighter pilots need to assume risk for being freighter pilots (completely agree but perma-bumping remains an unengaging, tedious interaction than needs some reasonable middle ground between gankers and frieghter pilots).
CCP hasn’t declared perma-bumping a problem, they have declared it a problem when they tried fixing the issue.
Because perma-bumping has been a possiblity of EVE for a long time it should remain in the game, this is a fallacy, the duration something exists doesn’t not determine its merit to continue to exist.
Pedantic conversation that doesn’t actually address the entire issue of perma-bumping but attempts to derail the conversation.
Blaming the victim.
Strawman characterizations and Strawman attacks (both are fallacies).
Ad hominem attacks.
‘Capital ships should take more than one person to be used’. Freighters were designed for single player usage and contending otherwise is disingenuous.
That a old thing (bumping) has been rebranded as a ‘therapy’ and reworked to provide the open crowd with free tickets to this Space Circus. You should be aware that there’s a new need for this type of extra-entertainment;, to escape the hardship of null sec and market pvp. And looking at those balloons being bounced around (almost like a jelly fish in an aquarium) is very soothing, works towards enhancing the new player experience, while also limiting stress and carpal tunnel syndrome.
I highly recommend you give it a try, whether as a balloon or as cure to your justified arrogance. In this line, I thank our devoted bumper pilots, who’ve been working hard all year around, to provide us some really awesome show.
