An issue should be a general one where (the majority of) all sides are involved. Yet in your case, it only applies to the few freighters being bumped. So maybe, you should try to work it out, on your own, or just pay the ransom.
Whatâs the percentage of players involved in âspawning an ESS in the seeker investigation siteâ issue ? By ghost training issue ? By wh signature spawning twice ? Less than 50% of the players . So according to your reasoning, those issues are not issues. This means what you are saying is absurd.
### **Gameplay:**
* Fixed another edge case of wormholes not expiring correctly.
âedge caseâ implies very low effect
1 Like
I still find it amusing the length to which players will go to propose solutions to âproblemsâ that only exist in their head because of their particular style of gameplay.
Bumping mechanics are working as intended. Any generic change to make it easier for freighters to avoid getting bumped in hisec is going to translate to having a harder time bumping ships off of gates/stations in actual combat situations. A fairly significant portion of combat pilots will be impacted by that. Any change limited mainly to freighters to make them harder to bump would be a wholly arbitrary response to the complaints of a vocal minority and ignore the fact that there are already ways in-game for freighters to avoid being bumped.
At the rate weâre going, this topic is going to devolve into the new AFK cloakingâŚ
Eitherway, the ESS issue cannot be compared to the Bumping. Because bumping was not implemented to favour gankers, but was based on some physics based for space (I could not explain to you, please read from CCP or google it).
But now that gankers use it to their advantage (which is rather well thought strategy), it still does not mean that it is an issue. And there are countless alternatives that have been mentioned throughout this thread to avoid being bumped. Itâs only up to Haulers to do their part and work it out.
Seeking the easy-way as to ask for CCP to make space easier for Haulers, is way out of line, and not going to happen.
1 Like
Nobody said they wanted to seek the easy-way, so you are the only one talking about that.
Why exactly are you even saying something that is not asked is not going to happen anyhow ?
You know what ? Thatâs the definition of a strawman : you make up a story and you say other people told you that story. Well, no.
And I did not compare them. YOU gave a general rule and I showed this general rule is absurd, which demonstrates that you are wrong. Again, you saying I compared the two issues is a straw man fallacy.
Thatâs a the definition of any problem : if the person having a problem did not exist, then the problem would not affect him.
Because problems that canât be avoided by making some choices are not problems, they are life.
So youâre saying people should never search solutions to their problems which are not caused by themselves but by other peopleâs choices.
Thatâs dumb. You are actually saying people should not report bugs, should not report botters⌠Please follow your own advice and donât post on the forum 
2 Likes
Except that bugs are things that are not working as designed, and botting is explicitly forbidden in the EULA/ToU/etc.
Bumping is neither of those things. It is working as designed and is perfectly allowable behavior. So your analogy falls quite short.
Trying to limit bumping because you donât like getting bumped while flying your freighter dangerously in hisec is like trying to make cloaking ships less effective because you donât like getting caught while mining in a rorq dangerously while mining in null. Hence, my comparison to bumping and the long-standing debate over AFK cloaking.
And in case you havenât noticed, CCP recently made it harder for rorqs to mine in null, not easier. I donât think theyâre of the mindset to be rewarding players for flying their capital ships dangerously at the moment.
Define dangerously, seems a very wide catch it all. For a hsec freighter flying dangerously is jumping through a gate. So do as I do donât use a freighterâŚ
Are you high? The OP & the Title of this whole thread, is obviously asking for a FIX/Module for Bumping, yes? Well, that fix is the easy way dear. This is the 105th post in this thread, wake up already.
A very fair question. By âdangerouslyâ I mean flying without scouts, escorts, or support. In other words, flying solo. If you want to fly a capital ship without being exceedingly vulnerable, donât fly alone.
Nop, I didnât. It would seem you donât understand, nor can effectively write good english, or use translation to understand and write your opinions. Donât blame me if your translator isnât working.
Now step back a bit and think about the next part, I have a webber there is a Macherial there, what is my choice I look for other ships, there is also a blackbird there, he has a sensor booster on. Well for me it is a simple choice, do not jump through, dock next door and log. Because at that point if I jump through and the blackbird suicide my freighter and the bumper gets on my freighter I am now caught and there is nothing I can do, I have a scout/webber, it is not enough.
Your options at this point are hoping that the bumper gets tired or is incompetent, or that you can magically create 3 characters in Talos with full gun skills to murder the bumper.
And in terms of the space, it is hisec, this is not a free for all space however much you think it is, and having an infinite point with no consequences is not by design. CCP are looking at the collision model, but they have people looking at options or ideas. I do not think that this suggestion that the OP suggested flies, I have suggested that freighters can be fitted like Bowheads with a BS MWD.
But I am looking deeper at the issues around the entire play of ganking freighters and that it has ended up that the freighter gankers are all solo multi-boxers says a lot about this play and how lame it is. Sorry but that is the gist of it.
yes, you did :
It is not. The design of HS is that when you prevent someone from warping you will get concordoken (Thatâs the ONLY effect of a point). THAT is the design. THAT is not respected with bumping mechanism.
1 Like
And I said that Bumping and the ESS subject, are incomparable, because Bumping is a physics mechanics, while the ESS subject is an issue. Right to the point, thank you.
and as I said I donât compare those issues. Right to the point, thank you.
Both are issues. so both should be subject to your general rules. But one of them is not. So your general rule is wrong.
There is not a single reason to compare the two things. So I donât .
1 Like
Man you really you write better english - hard to read.
CCP created Eve online. It is their Design. So we as players, do not have a say what their design should be. Again, bumping was not designed to favor gankers, it was based on the physics in space.
Now that Gankers have the bright idea to use the âbumping mechanic physicsâ to their advantage, does not mean it is âan issueâ. Itâs all is working as intended. But if Haulers have a problem with Gankers, then they need to sort it out.
Either by:
- avoiding the bump
- pay the ransom
- stay docked
- change to a safer career
So because you can contrive of a single scenario where the counter is effective, the counter is never effective? Thatâs faulty logic. No counter is effective all the time.
CCP seems to disagree with you. Yes, there are harsher consequences for aggressive action, but hisec is, indeed, a free-for-all.
All of EvE is a free-for-all. Thatâs the whole point of the game.
Now, although I disagree with you, the OP, and those who share your opinion on bumping mechanics, I do wholeheartedly agree with you that solo players multi-boxing entire fleets of suicide ships is lame and an abuse of the rules of the game. Multi-boxing suicide gank fleets are an issue that needs to be addressed because the players flying them are violating the EULA/ToU/etc. But the solution to that problem isnât to change bumping.
I point back to my more conventional combat situation where two groups of combat ships are actively fighting each other, and one side is trying to keep the other on the field by bumping them away from a gate/station. How can you âfixâ freighter bumping (and I use that term in quotes, because itâs not really broken) without breaking bumping in other places?
It cannot be done. But those few Freighter pilots (because others use other alternatives) donât give a damn about whatâs in play here. Theyâre only concerned on their needs, and if they have to walk on everyone else, so be it. Also why this mechanics is not going to be addressed anytime soon.
1 Like
Yes it exactly means it is an issue. The design of Eve is, that aggressive actions are punished by concord. The bump implementation is at fault for not respecting this design.
This is where you are wrong, Hilmar replied that he is looking at the collision boxes and intend to change them but it is a change some way away. So they have a team looking at this issue and are open to suggestions, so if it was by design why would they be doing that?
Not it is not, there are limitations in hisec, you may wish it is a free for all but it is not and quite obviously so.
Good to see you understand the fact of it being lame, the EULA paret I donât agree with as I see nothing that says that they cannot do it. The only solution is to change bumping, but I am aware of the issues in other areas of space.
That CCP want to look at the collision boxes is important and your point of view being that it is not broken is as wrong as if I said it is totally broken, I think it is broken for hisec freighters because it enables an infinite consequence less point that gives too many advantages. But the bumping as such in other areas is perfectly fine.
And this is something that many of you forget when looking at things:
This is the issue pure and simple above anything else. The thing that you do not want to do is change the mechanics and damage other areas of play.
Freighter bumping and cloaky camping. Harassing game play to setup for kills. Both should be made far more challenging to do.
You want to pop the freighter or attack people in a system, please get on with it vs these tactics that frustrate players by forcing them to participate in your game play style.
Freighter pilots, get a friend or another account trained in Recon. Fly Rapier or Huginn, have an active duel between the two for HiSec and web sling off the gates with triple webs.
As an alternative there are some other games out there for your solo long haul play style. In one, about the only place you can bump haulers is on station. You get fined, a bounty put on your head and station restrictions in lawful space for doing that. Bump/harassing game play still happens but the bumper pays a price to do so.