I think using the bump ship is a waste of resources.
Like you said numerous gank fleets are operating at the same time. Concentrating two of the gank fleets in a single system like Eudama could kill two freighters at a time without the need of a bump ship.
Or if the gank fails then the second gank fleet is ready to go finished off the damaged freighter.
Having such a juicy target that is nearly as expensive as the freighter it is bumping being able to be ganked by jumping it with web and scrambler destroyers is rather counter productive.
@Dyver_Phycad those gank alts are not 1 person. They are people that gank both separately and together with their alts.
Setting up the gank or pinging for people to come online and kill a whale isn’t the only reason to bump. If bumping were removed ganking would still be something you cry about.
Probably, but at least it would be about other things than this annoying feature that keeps me from doing what I want to do for dozens of minutes to hours just so that someone can get their gank alts in position because that someone was not ready to gank me. That would be positive progress.
The more time they just bump you the more time you have to get stuff in position to escape or to prevent the gank. Sounds to me like this should actually help the freighter pilot…
…except of course you are just really bad at EVE and rather than attempt to play the game on your own you just sit back and wait for CCP to solve the trouble you got yourself into or complain about the game on the forums.
Likewise if gankers need to tackle a target without getting concorded for prolonged times because they were not ready to gank me. We both rely on CCP to fix our incompetence, I guess.
That is not correct and you know it. We simply use game mechanics as they are in the game, we do not rely on CCP to change anything or bump and gank the freighter for us, we actually play the game and use the mechanics it features already. You are the one crying for change.
One of this mechanics is simply physics, in this case inertia of mass. You see, big fat objects are really slow at changing their state of motion because of their mass, and since ships need to be aligned with the object they warp to at 75% of max speed it takes them some time to get to this velocity and trajectory.
This is why freighters are vulnerable to bumps. Other ships aren’t, just the really fat ones. The reason why people use this is irrelevant. It is a property of a freighter to be fat slow and therefore susceptible to bumps. There are other ships with which you can move stuff around who are not vulnerable this way. There are 12 different t1 industrial hauler ships available who don’t suffer this issue and 8 t2 of which 4 of them are impossible to catch by whatever means if flown properly.
So why not chose another ship if bumping is such a concern for you? You have all the options right there, you don’t even have to wait for CCP to implement something for you, they already did that years ago.
There are people who seem perfectly capable of using freighters all the time without any issue by preparing and accepting the traits that ship has and taking the necessary steps to operate it properly.
Nope, I know that this is not correct. The game mechanics are there, yes, but just like you accuse freighters of not playing properly by “playing solo”, you use a solo ship to tackle something for prolonged periods of time just so that a fleet can get ready. It is the exact same thing, regardless of whether it is a proper game mechanic or not. Gankers are dependent on bumping these days that they decry every suggestion to limit the usefulness of it for their purpose because their bot-like behavior cannot work without it.
This is also not correct because it is very much possible to bump, for instance, DST and non-agility bonused T1 haulers such as Bestowers as Siegfried has demonstrated several times. “Flown properly” is a very subjective thing because a single Blackbird suicide tackle can negate any efforts of a “flown properly” ship.
Yes, there definitely are. And coincidentally many of them are passively and AFK flown freigthers slowboating through Niarja all the time. Other ships also include passively and AFK flown freighter swarms that belong to the group that “fights against bot aspirant behavior and AFK behavior”. These are, among other things, the “necessary steps to operate it properly”.
A freighter is a capital ship and no one ever said that they should be operated solo. They can be operated solo and a lot of people do successfully, but they do the work necessary to make sure they don’t run into situations where operating a freighter solo is not the best idea.
And it is absolutely not the same if people use existing game mechanics to their full potential or someone cries on the forums for change. One side plays the game as it is and the other cries for changes for they personal benefit. That is a pretty big difference.
Siegfried is a very very good bumper and that is not something everyone can do. Even an unbonused t1 hauler is in warp in under 10s and of course this gets better if they are fit properly.
I’m not sure why you are suddenly talking about suicide Blackbirds? Obviously there are tactics to intercept t1 and even t2 ships, I listed them because you cried about bumping and they are not vulnerable to it in every but the most extreme and unlikely circumstances. Do you only consider an option viable if there is no counter or possibility to explode it at all? Maybe then most of EVE is not really your thing…
…except maybe hauling stuff, because we both know why you intentionally not mentioned blockade runners, which are completely uncatchable if the pilot is not completely dumb. There is no known counter to blockade runners than stupidity of it’s pilot.
If that was true, that would be even more amazing. What a nice way of establishing a business and keep eradicate the competition. It’s almost as if EVE was a competitive sandbox where people compete with each other about resources and power. Who would have thought that.
Why should I mention them? They fall under the couple of ships that you earlier mentioned as not bumpable. It makes no sense to bring them up. As for uncatchable: It is certainly possible to catch blockade runners very easily. For one, you can just prepare the gate grid with Condord swarms (which regularly happens), you can also prepare it with wrecks, containers, corpses, drones and so on – and that with amounts that are not even EULA breaking. Bad luck also plays a big role when you, for instance, spawn right next to an NPC or another ship so that you cannot cloak. It is also possible to lock a blockade runner before they can cloak just by server ticks. Admittedly, you have to have an extremely good internet connection and reflexes but it happens.
And as stated in other threads: This is not the case. Removal or limitation of bumping would increase ganking, not decrease it. The only thing removal or limitation of bumping would do is getting rid of an annoying part of the ganking process.
If CODE would still do that, I’d agree. But I see so many AFK autopiloting freighters all over the place and in gank heavy systems in particular that this claim is nothing but a farce.
I honestly have never encountered any such situation you describe. But it really doesn’t matter, as we are now in the territory of extremely unlikely events, bad luck and borderline EULA breaking object spamming. And still you give the impression that is not good enough, that no matter how secure it gets it is not secure enough.
Ok, let’s take a step back:
Freighters are fig fat capital ships with extremely big cargo holds and because of their mass they are really slow to align and therefore are susceptible to bumps.
There are A LOT of other options to Freighter which have other weaknesses and trade-offs but where bumping is only in extremely rare cases an issue.
There are even options which are so save that the only way to catch them is bad piloting, bad luck or EULA breaking object spamming around gates.
Do you still think you have no options and are at the mercy of bumpers? You will not get a 100% save ship in EVE. You almost get one with blokade runners, but even that seems to be not enough for you. So don’t lie to us if you tell us that bumping is your concern, you cry about every other option as well and if bumping would be nerfed you would be back here crying for more, because what you want is a way to 100% secure AFK hauling, nothing less.
Lol, there is not even an argument here. The only reason why you write something like that is in the hopes that if someone already agreeing with you he will take that as good point because it triggers his confirmation bias.
Yeah, it is none of your business why we do what we do. But it seems even you agree that the majority of freighters reaches it’s target even AFK on ap and therefore I have to ask: what was the problem again?
I am not crying about lack of safety. I merely refute your argument that BR are “completely uncatchable” because even best piloting can and does result in common situations where BR are very easily catchable. If you accuse me of lying, you should stop that first.
The only reason I want bumping limited is the annoyance potential and the hard fact that I know it is not necessary for ganking at all. Bumping is only necessary for bots and bot-like gankers who need to resort to non-concordable tackle so that they can play their game.
That is your opinion. Matter of fact is, however, that you currently are not everywhere. Yesterday, for instance, Niarja was devoid of a ganker presence for very long time. Your reliance on bumpers for ganks made it possible for Niarja to be a safe route. Would bumping be removed or limited, you would have had a gank squad presence there and could have ganked a multitude of freighters passing through there, among others one that had around 5B in value in the cargo. Your reliance on bumping makes it possible for freighters to be safer than they should be. Whether you call that confirmation bias baiting or not is none of my business.
As said multiple times: I cannot stand the annoyance of being stuck with an obnoxious person like Mbube or Siegfried or Honey for hours. It’s not necessary and it only makes ganking feel worse than it actually is.
I actually want the contrary: That people actively haul because that would give me better rewards for doing it. But CODE now knowingly or not supports AFK hauling by leaving most of these people be and in fact stalk and punish active hauling over passive AFK hauling. That is something I think is very funny.
In summary: Bumping is not necessary for ganking. Bumping actually impedes ganking because the “professional gankers” rely too much on it. Bumping only causes annoyance and makes ganking feel worse than it actually should be. That’s all.
None of your concluding statements make any sense:
Bumping is not necessary for ganking. So what? Catalysts aren’t necessary for ganking. Suicide Blackbirds aren’t necessary for ganking. That isn’t a reason to remove those from the game. That isn’t a reason to do anything.
Bumping actually impedes ganking because the “professional gankers” rely too much on it. How does it “impede” anything if the people with the most experience are using it effectively? Are you claiming they are doing it wrong somehow, and could gank more without it? That makes no sense, and isn’t obvious at all how removing a tool used by some gankers would create a situation where more things would happen. In general, removing things just reduces options and the ease of accomplishing things, and while you can always invent convoluted reasons why deleting something would have some unexpected outcome, it is pure conjecture at best.
Bumping only causes annoyance and makes ganking feel worse than it actually should be. I am highly dubious of this claim. While I can accept that since bumping is used to harass haulers (usually to try to extort a ransom or trick them into a duel) removing bumping would make these targets happier because of additional free, mechanical safety leaving them more time to watch Netflix, I don’t believe at all that players who lose a transport ship will be happier if they are suicide pointed and then alphaed by a fleet of Tornados rather than bumped for 10 minutes and shot by a bunch of Catalysts. It is the loss of their precious stuff that drives these tears and cries for more safety, not the method of tackling.
I’m not actually adverse to doing something to limit perma-bumping in highsec, but if and when CCP change something, I don’t expect it to change anything. Bumping is already a niche issue, easily countered, and one that is also reasonably balanced as it requires the constant attention of the bumper during the tackle process. It isn’t easy to do in the first place, and requires concentration and effort to keep up. If they implement that warp timer, gankers will adapt and haulers won’t (or will adapt by taking on more risk and cargo because of the perception of increased safety) and still lose their stuff, coming to the forums to whine about how this or that is “unbalanced” or “unfun” because they lost to another player.
If you are serious about punishing AFK haulers, you should advocate for the roll-back of some of the more recent buffs to highsec haulers and make them more vulnerable. The reason no-one shoots them is that years of “balance” changes have buffed their EHP to ludicrous levels where it requires an organized fleet of a dozen or two players (or a very high proficiency at multi-boxing) to even try to way-lay a freighter in modern highsec. The sad thing is these changes benefited AFK (and just plain bad) haulers much more so than the ones who spent effort and understood the mechanics.
While it pains me to say it, highsec is so safe and ganking so rare, it is probably the AFK haulers (who keep their cargo in 1-2B ISK range or so in a tanked freighter) who are playing the game most efficiently these days. The bar is just too high for most players to take up careers as highwaymen and try to knock them over. The MER numbers show almost every ship makes it safely to its destination in highsec. There just isn’t enough risk left to really separate the good haulers from the bad.
None of that makes any sense. You need fewer people than ever to gank freighters, fewer even then before the change that gave freighters slots and still not more than before the EHP buff. You need somewhere between 7-13 characters to gank a freighter. How much fewer people do you want until it is dangerous enough again? 1? Guess what, that is possible already with duel traps. Freighters are capital ships, ganking them should require more than 2 characters.
That is childishly hyperbolic. You know that. Catalysts actually gank, of course they are necessary for a gank. Bumpers, on the other hand, do not gank. The only thing they do is give an unprepared alt swarm time to get to the gank location because they are not ready or logged in, or watch Netflix until the bumper finds a target.
As explained above, if you read my posts. Without bumpers next to no ganking is taking place. Yes, you can gank more without bumpers, as I have described multiple times in multiple threads already (threads that you have been active in and responded to my descriptions lengthily, too). None of the situations I described resulted in convoluted or more complex settings. They only require gankers to be in the systems they want to gank in, nothing else. Stop playing dumb.
There would not be more safety since gankers are ready to strike in more systems and not just one central location from which they need to travel to a gank target.
The thing that makes bumping frustrating and annoying is that you sit there for 10-30 minutes to even hours while a Machariel bumps you repeatedly while every counter measure costs you more than you earn with your trip. Without bumping, you would indeed still lose your ship but at least you would not be sitting there and get humped by a centipede.
That makes no sense. How can you need less characters than ever if EHP has only gone up? DPS hasn’t changed significantly, so it takes more people and/or more expensive ships than ever before to kill a freighter.
I guess you can argue that it is easier to fit a poorly fit freighter than at a time when CCP didn’t give you the opportunity to trade off your survivability for cargo capacity, that is hand rope to the greedy carebears to hang themselves, but that cuts both ways. Some freighters are fit such to be easier to kill, and some harder to kill, than before. Aside from that though, the constant buffs to highsec safety, nerfs to tools criminals use, and direct buffs to the industrial ships themselves have only pretty much only gone in one direction, to the point now very large fleets of gankers are needed to even think about PvPing a single other player in a weapon-less ship.
The whole system generates so little player interaction, and the small bit it does is so one-dimensional, it needs a complete rethink of how criminals, their targets, and the vigilantes interact in highsec.
No, a tackle of some sort is absolutely necessary for a fleet of criminals to get to a target. Now there are other ways to gank, but for outlaws bumping is pretty much required to catch a moving target like a hauler.
But your point was that since you don’t need bumping it should be removed. That doesn’t make any sense as a reason in and of itself. Propose to remove bumping for some other reason if you must, but just because it isn’t absolutely required isn’t a very compelling reason at all.
Even if it isn’t required, it certainly is useful.
Perhaps I just lack the energy to comprehend your previous posts but I still don’t get it. I don’t see how gankers would gank more if they lack access to the tool of bumping which allows them to tackle a target. Gankers would be able to cover less area without the ability to send scouts out and tackle any whales they find. They would only be limited to a particular system, or even a particular grid, and thus many more freighters would slip by their ambush. That would also make hunting less lucrative and more tedious, pushing even more pirates out of the dying profession.
I see no plausible way that results in more ganking, only much less.
Again, how can they strike in more systems if they are confined by a lack of tackle to just one system? Are you proposing lowering the EHP of haulers so less gankers are needed per gank and they can split the fleet and spread out more? Because I don’t see otherwise how a gank fleet can be in two places at once.
Maybe you really believe this, but I don’t think this is the case at all. Most people will be just as angry if they lose a ship to a gank fleet immediately or after a short bumping session. But I’ll agree I can’t really know this for sure, so I’ll accept that is how you would feel, or did feel when/if you lost a ship.
It’s hard for me to have much sympathy for those who undock in a lumbering behemoth like a freighter with no backup, or escort, or even scout when there are many alternate choices that are effectively immune to bumping. It’s greed/lazyness pure and simple, and someone should be out there calling these haulers on their poor, or at least risky, choices. It’s the only fair and just thing to do for the sake of those who are prudent and careful when it comes to their hauling.
The gankers are confined to one system at the moment because they rely on the bumper to tackle the target. Without or with limited bumping, gankers alt farms would be spread out in several systems and can strike a lot more often than now. As said before, there are already more than enough ganker alt farms available to cover a lot of systems but at the very least the most ganked systems Niarja, Uedama, Isanamo and Poinen. There is absolutely no confinement happening if bumping was removed or limited. I do not see where you get that from. You do not need 30 chars to gank a freighter. You need 7-13 chars. Only if you wanted to gank a tanked freighter with ridiculous cargo values, you would need more and even then bumping is not necessary: You would just move a gank fleet to the projected gank system on the way and have the already existing army of scanner and scout alts follow the freighter, just like now. The scanners on the Jita undock and in Urlen and other places give more than enough time to prepare a gank fleet. And the gank fleets need to move already anyway even with the bumping.
Nothing. Would. Change. For. The. Gank. Itself.
Likewise I don’t have any sympathy for people who want me dead but are not ready to strike and instead need to resort to a non-concordable tackle to enable their gameplay. I find it lazy and greedy that they should be able to tackle me until their netflix movie is over or their dinner done until they can muster a gank fleet for me.
I’m not sure how you understand how this works. Gankers don’t have unlimited resources and accounts like you assume. Aside from a handful of ganking aficionados who multibox and Miniluv, there is pretty much no one hunting freighters anymore as the number of players you need online at one time is already unreasonably high for most groups. Those multi-boxers won’t have time to log a bunch of accounts out and a new set in to catch a fat freighter in one system without access to tackle - they will be confined to just one system at a time and see less targets passing the single gate they will be forced to camp. Even a traditional freighter ganking fleet with many individual players would have the same problem: they will have to pick a single place to camp and miss many potential targets for lack of a tackle. Miniluv uses pings to gather a fleet of players with single (or a few) accounts when they spot a super whale. They would be shut down completely if there was no tackle to give time to gather a fleet.
None of this will make ganking more common place or spread to more systems. It will just decrease it even more and pretty much confine it to the place where the finite number of ganking fleets are stationed. More ganking fleets will not spring up to cover other systems - they will just become completely safe spaces for the big haulers.
Don’t hate the player hate the game. I am sure the freighter gankers don’t care about your sympathy, but it’s not like they need it as nothing is actually changing. They are playing the game as designed and winning at it, all the while having fun, and are not agitating for it to be tilted more in their favour like you apparently are.
CCP isn’t going to implement your radical make-highsec-hauling-even-safer proposals. It’s safe and lifeless enough as it is, and while I’d love a complete reimagining of how highsec crime works to give everyone more ways to interact, if that ever comes it isn’t going to let haulers pay even less attention to the game client as you are asking for. Realistically though, it probably won’t ever change significantly, and bumping and the rest of the current system will be there until the servers get shut off.
It’s always been possible to gank a freighter solo or with one other person. Is this new to you? Are you wanting CCP to step in and limit multiboxing? If so you’re messing with a lot more than just ganking.
Edit: Unless the gank loot isn’t split or you’re just doing it for fun, the point would kinda be to use as little people as possible so payouts are higher. So if you can manage 10, 20, or 30 accounts by yourself or with a partner more power to you.
Freighter EHP was increased and that’s a fact. I dunno where you get your strange points from
