There’s no doubt in my mind that bumping a Freighter for hours is grieving. However, my issue with bumping is there’s no consequence for the action. There should be kinetic damage for it
No. And it’s “GrieFing”… not GrieVing…
http://corrinmor.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Single_0125_180417.gif
1 Like
It’s just lore into an unknown field and a coverup for a flawed mechanic.
Alternatives have been discussed to death over the last few years and pretty much every alternative would actually end up worse for the current targets than for the current bumpers.
It’s relatively easy to propose a change that only considers the impact from a single perspective. However, it becomes a lot more difficult to design a new approach when considered from all the possible sides and how new mechanics might be used by all players.
1 Like
Changing the maths slightly so that targets above max speed slow to max speed almost instantly is something that could be looked into. Currently the maths treats the slow down to max speed from above it in a similar way to slowing to zero, or it seems to, which makes it very easy for a bumper to take 100% control away from the target, since you can’t turn at all or warp when above 100% speed.
Having that change would make it so that you could bump someone away from something easily still, but not remove all control in any direction.
But that’s just a slight tweak that makes a bit of common sense, since if we are limited because of warp drag to that speed, going above it should result in very fast slow down.
Not with the way freighters turn. Max speed in the wrong direction means >30 seconds from alignment to the right direction.
No, the only way to get out of a bump once it’s happened would be to have bookmarks everywhere so you’re aligned to at least one.
2 Likes
this actually once worked for me at a lowsec gate. i was sitting in an iteron, and got bumped by a dramiel. i’ve tried initiating warp towards stuff i was pointing at. he bumped me hard enough, that the battleship didn’t hit me and i got even more lucky from getting bumped right towards a celestial i could warp to.
As Parsol says you can sometimes get lucky with something in the direction you are being bumped.
However I wasn’t wanting to remove bumping as a mechanic for stopping you warping to a particular object with my point, just the inability to do ‘anything’ related to steering your ship. It might not be the thing you wanted to do but it’s something at least.
I think the Industrial vs Ganker issues are more deep seated than bumping admittedly, but this thread is not the thread to get into that discussion.
When was the last time you know of that a freighter was bumped for hours? You’re talking about ghosts here. Let me give you this scenario:
Yesterday I got a freighter to duel me, which took roughly 15 minutes of bumping before he was pointed. He paid me a 1b ransom and I blew up his ship, which donated an additional 1b to my cause.
Today I found the exact same pilot flying a freighter, but this time he had a war against PIRAT that was going to go live in 30 minutes. I kept him bumped and he ended up logging out in which I suicided an alt into him and gave him a logoff timer. When the war went live I messaged a contact from PIRAT and they came to kill him. He dropped 500m in loot, which they let me keep. I have made 2.5b in two days off the same guy. First instance he was bumped for 15 minutes, second instance for 30 minutes.
Is this griefing?
1 Like
Personally 30 minutes is across the line which I would consider griefing. Because it’s only poor game mechanics that allow you to do that with no cost or significant risk to yourself.
Obviously other people would have different views on the time line that becomes unreasonable.
The use of alts like that I also consider a poor game mechanics but clearly allowed and not one that will ever change at this stage in the games life.
A 15 minute warp anyway timer wouldn’t be unreasonable though. It’s long enough your gank fleet can expire any criminal timers but not long enough you can keep someone bumped while you gank three or four other ships. And it keeps people from being disadvantaged because they don’t have 12 hours to play being a pinball. Or it could be changed at the ships fitting level instead allowing more slots and fittings meaning smart players can pulse a mwd to get out of trouble while people that fit badly are still good targets.
Yes ganking has an important role in the game. But you want both sides engaged in the action at the time. Not it all decided by factors set in stone an hour or day or week earlier. And currently ganking fails on the front of engagement during the action most of the time
1 Like
I have to pay for my Machariel fit and the implants I use. I am easily ganked as well. My ship is undocked and uncloaked in space so I am at risk. Anyone with the resources and know how can dispose of my ship at any time.
Alts are a necessary evil. I like them because it allows me to do things or take on roles on my own when there isn’t anyone around to help me.
Bumping is something that generally happens after you’ve failed to take care of yourself before embarking with your slow, vulnerable hauling vessel. There are people that have never been bumped because they put the effort into protecting their assets. There is preventative play that goes into it before you get bumped, and then there’s even counter-play available to you once you’re being bumped.
The only issue here is that there are lazy, ignorant, or just plain bad players that get bumped and killed, then cry about how unfair it was that they lost everything when there’s plenty of preventative and counter-play available to them. So shame on you lazy haulers.
3 Likes
When the preventative play is ‘have another alt and hope the ganker doesn’t gank them first as well’ it’s not lazy, ignorant or bad play to not have the web alt. It’s poor gameplay design.
And no, your bump mach is not ‘easily ganked’. To gank a bump mach you need a proper gank gang on standby. Of significantly more than 1. Meaning, yet again, significant alt play.
Are you bad for taking advantage of that bad gameplay design, of course not.
But it doesn’t make it any less bad gameplay design. It’s just a fail at the CCP level, not at the player level.
2 Likes
Jennifer Marland (i never remember the full name) shows that one only needs two ships for that. i think she even did it solo as well. the problem here isn’t that it’s hard, because it isn’t. the problem is that a lot of people refuse to do it. if you look for it, you can find that a lot of white knights are stuck in the idea that they can’t, or don’t want to, use successfull tactics “the other side” uses.
except for jennifer, of course, who is one of the very few actually sane people who do it right.
1 Like
Alts are allowed as you’ve pointed out. The game has developed where if you don’t use alts you’re are in a lot of cases at a disadvantage against those that do. Most activities in this game benefit exponentially from having alts that you’re able to multibox simultaneously.
Sure it’s being lazy. You are flying a ship with a base hull price around 1.2b. Your contents are as valuable as you’re willing to put in there. Let’s say 1b-3b as the standard, which is very common. That is your ship and cargo and if you want to keep them yours, you will need to protect it. The moment you undock you acknowledge that it’s likely that someone will try to blow you up - it’s just the way the game was made.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all to have literally 1 alt that you use to web yourself with. Hell, you can farm SP on it and have it be literally free.
Yes it is.
The rest is just the usual whining for CCP to change something because you find it unfair or unfavorable. So you think the mechanics are bad. That’s fair, you can have that opinion and stance. The fact is that you can easily replace the word ‘alt’ with ‘friend’ or ‘trusted corp member’ and you have an activity that engages not only you and the bumper trying to catch you, but another individual that’s been tasked with protecting you. Is it now going to be unreasonable that you should have a friend web or scout for you?
1 Like
i’d like to point something out. CCP is actively trying to shift culture towards more people playing together. new players growing up with the situation that it’s normal to work together and help, and be helped, will change the landscape of the game completely. it’ll take time, but it’ll work out. i’m actually happy about the fleet PvE thing. it shows where they are going.
That’s even more unreasonable to have a ‘friend’ have to do it. As was pointed out by oh, the entire nullsec block back when freighter convoys happened before jump freighters. If you want people to quit the game from boredom, escort requirements are the way to do it. Hence why the current gameplay mechanics are so bad when it comes to industrial gameplay.
I would note, though I’m not going to go into full details here, that what I’d like to see involves concord not blowing you up for at least 2-3 minutes, and maybe even longer. So please don’t lump me in as someone going ‘ganking is to easy, nerf it’. Regardless of easy or hard, I just don’t believe the current mechanics surrounding the gameplay of ganking & bumping are good, and better mechanics would engage people more on both sides of the equation.
1 Like
If you look at this bump Mach loss: Machariel | STOP AND FRISK | Killmail | zKillboard
versus this Skiff loss: Skiff | FluffieB | Killmail | zKillboard
That Skiff, properly tanked took 2 catalysts to kill.
When you throw the fits into PyFA:
EHP
Mach: 44K (https://puu.sh/xwYKe/65d545f04c.png)
Skiff: 71K (https://puu.sh/xwYJR/c6d95aa122.png)
That Skiff wasn’t ganked (it was a war target), but 1 catalyst in a .5 system putting out 650 DPS, can apply ~13K damage with good application, in 20 seconds in a 0.5 system.
When not bumping, the bump Machs are often stationary just out of gate jump range.
4 catalysts is enough in Uedama to gank that bump Mach fit (go 5 for added certainty), which is considerably easier to kill than that tanked Skiff fit.
I’m sure if I go looking, I can find a retriever properly tanked that would be more difficult to kill (and I’m certain I could find a Procurer harder to kill).
1 Billion give or take in loss, for an easy gank if people are motivated.
I can totally understand the sentiment. A good bumper like Faylee is everyone’s enemy, so it’s easy to assume that is a hard gank (it’s a battleship after all). When you look at the numbers though, it’s easier to gank than tanked mining ships and lots of people cry about how easy they are to gank.
I don’t disagree with you on that, but it’s the system we all live in.
I know I value access to alts, even just to light cynos for myself. Much safer than jumping to a cyno lit by someone else.
I must admit though, I have little sympathy for people that get ganked; and not because I favour a game where there should be conflict, but simply because it takes a lot of looking to find mining ships with proper tank. They are there, but there are so many more where people just don’t even try to protect themselves. It’s the same for freighters.
I’d be totally sympathetic if they did everything right and it was still in the favour of gankers. But it’s so rare to see gank victims that care about their own safety aside from asking for CCP to change mechanics.
2 Likes
you didn’t include gate turrets. they’ll chew through the cats pretty quickly, so it either needs them have tanks to prolong their activity, or needs another ship to pull fire, before they engage.
good point. Lucky I’m no ganker. I’d be so ■■■■ at it.
So need’s the Mach >150km off gate or a few more cats.
1 Like
Yes, now explain how a Catalyst is going to keep up with a MWD mach easily please. Sure they might sit still, but if you are doing that way in advance of your freighter, well 1, they can get another, and 2, now you aren’t ‘counter ganking to save your freighter’. Now you have entered the realm of serious ganking yourself. And well, even I was forgetting the gate turrets as well as Yellow just mentioned.
Also include the difference between ganking a 100m/s skiff with no prop mod because it doesn’t have the PG to fit one properly to ganking a fast moving prop mod for fast acceleration is quite significant.
Pure EHP maths would barely apply even if you were using a Nado gank, but even then you would have tracking issues if the Mach was moving. And that skiff you presented was semi decently fit also, 5 tank modules out of 10 slots. And probably wasn’t the 71k you assumed either since probably not max shield skills given the T1 fit.
Though sure, I’m not arguing they can’t be ganked, but it’s not as easy as EFT maths says.
So sure, it’s smart gameplay of the gankers to use a bump mach etc, it’s good use of the mechanics CCP presents, and if you use several alts there are ‘counters’. But they aren’t good gameplay mechanics provided to us from CCP.
But yeah, if people fit poorly they don’t get my sympathy either if they have viable choices. But when it comes to industrial ships, they don’t get to choose. There isn’t the option of a good fit or a bad fit really (ok, nothing fitted at all). The fits are basically proscribed and nearly everything is built into the hulls. And that is bad. We take inspiration from the wrong eras for our industry.