Rhetoric again. there are a couple of issues with ganking that I have raised previously does that mean that I am not allowed to talk about them because you can say got you, silly comment. They are Loot scooping through DST’s and of course docking rights rescinded for -10’s in NPC stations and as far as I am concerned those issues are already up there.
But if this infinite no consequence point called bumping is adjusted to be not possible or weakened in such a way that it becomes purely situational I will think the game will be in a better state and am quite happy for you lot to gank to your hearts desires.
Since when is “the exact way the warp mechanics work currently” the same as “everything EVE stands for”?
And before you say that my additions are way too harsh, you’re basically proposing an “I Win” button for hisec freighters.
Lolwut? My proposal was for a two minute timer. A competent and prepared gank squad is going to kill a freighter within 30 seconds of it jumping through the gate, long before it can activate its emergency warp timer and escape. The only freighters that are getting an “I win” button are the ones targeted by incompetent and unprepared gankers that need 10+ minutes to organize their attack. And that’s less “I win” for the freighter and more “JFC you people suck at EVE, you don’t deserve this kill” for the idiots who can’t organize a proper gank.
So by your own definition, taking 5, 7, or even 9 minutes means you’re not incompetent and not unprepared, right?
But you set your emergency warp at only 2 minutes, which means that anyone who would have taken between 2 and 10 minutes to execute a gank is, by your own definition, competent and prepared yet gets denied the fruits of their labor anyways. Doesn’t exactly seem fair, does it?
This seems a bit pedantic, I know, but it highlights my biggest issue with all “fixes” of this nature: it is entirely arbitrary. Even if you did make the timer 10 minutes to line up with your definition of competency and preparedness, what about folks who actually ransom their targets? I know ransoming isn’t quite as common as it used to be, but this change would all but eliminate it entirely in hisec by way of game mechanics.
Those are the other issues that should be looked at but I would be happy with that, but do bear in mind that things do change in game and that works both ways.
Oh FFS you’re getting into absurd nitpicking. The point of a 2 minute timer is that it’s more than enough to execute a gank if you are on-grid and prepared when the target jumps in. Competent and prepared groups can do this and have no problem accomplishing a gank. Nitpicking over the exact number of minutes is ignoring the very significant difference between “on-grid and prepared” and “scrambling to put together a gank fleet because you weren’t ready when the target appeared”.
Talk quickly then, you have two minutes to arrange a deal or activate your guns. And I have zero sympathy for the people whose ransom method is “pay me lots of ISK or I’m going to annoy you into submission”.
Why is this the criteria exactly? Not your personal opinion, not why you feel it should be so, from a purely game mechanics standpoint, why is this the criteria? Are there any other situations where a ship gets to magically escape if its attackers don’t have sufficient forces to kill it on-grid when they start an attack?
Until you can answer this rationally, factually, I have nothing further to say to you on this because it’s pretty clear that we fundamentally disagree on this topic.
They should change, but it is not about freighters, for a nearly 1b ship it is about teamwork or alts.
The real catalyst for ship collision changes is the miners. New players should be able to mine solo. This device is for ships that want to get away, miners what to stay where they are.
Not too mention the magic shield is completely unrealistic.
But any change has to work for all kinds of ship collisions, combat, undocking, NPCs, hauling, mining, etc, etc.
Ship collisions are more complicated than freighter bumping, suggestions, of which there are 1000s, have to make sense in all these cases.
Or get on the less convoluted way and offer a fix for a broken mechanic. Actually, even if bumping is overall a silly game mechanic, the only case when it need to be fixed is for capital ships as their huge mass a very slow align to get in warp make them vulnerable to a tactic without any counter
In fact bumping is not an serious issue for any other class of ship as even in the case of a battleship is very hard for a bumper to prevent it forever from warping off
In the case of freighters, bumping is a virtually a tackling mechanic who can be used in high sec indefinitely, as it not cause an aggression flag, so the target don’t have any practical ways to retaliate.
Suicide ganking the bumper is a silly and unreasonable solution, as bringing gankers to fix an issue caused mostly by ganking sounds almost retarded.
The next step will be to bring even more gankers to gank the gankers who ganked gankers
Thank you for your free “bumps” but you miss the most relevant issue here, “vulnerable to a tactic without any counter”.
You want your iwin tackling button to stay in place and give us hollow theories about risk and consequences.
As long as tackling a freighter have no consequences for the bumper, freighter pilot must have a counter and a mean to end a stalemate who can be perpetuated indefinitely by the bumper.
You cannot shoot someone in high sec without an aggression flag, you silly. And that is the main reason for that a freighter pilot need a way to end the stalemate.
I don’t know where you’re getting the idea of “legal” from. And this seems like an off topic comment.
You claimed bumping was a tactic without any counter, and I presented you a counter. It seems like you don’t want to accept it for some reason and would rather start making off topic comments.
but you miss the most relevant issue here, “vulnerable to a tactic without any counter”.