open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Introduce bump damage
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

SellStuff Hunny
Posted - 2011.01.26 20:16:00 - [1]
 

This is quite plain and simple idea, I did some searches and at least recently it was not discussed, soo...

As it is now ships bump and fly away faster or slower depending on the bump giver and receiver mass/inertia. As it is - it's happening all the time, on gates, stations, pos'es, anywhere in space. Sometimes it works as bumpage from dock/pos/jump range and kill... sometimes as warp disruptor (not allowing to warp)...

I think this is $h!t, and should be solved with introducing bump damage...
pros:
- blobs solved (more as a sideeffect), warping in wings would be mandatory to survive and not get yourself killed, warping to already clogged space point would result in possible multiple deaths (AS IT SHOULD BE)
- unrealistic clogging and undocking of hundreds of ships
- warping whole mass of a moon worth titans in one 30km bubble
one could actually RAM THE SC into a titan (that dude on one video totally wiped a concord station with a nyx...
- realism/common sense introduced
- forced population reallocation where you can actually undock in time (undock's should be timed based on ship size, undocking speed etc)

cons
- THE RAGE OF METAGAME - yea I agree this would ruin ALOT of metagaming things, bumping stuff out of pos, ramming gates on reapproach, colliding two fleets, "accidental dramiels" etc.
nothing else.

Overall it would solve blobs to a manageable scale, would restrict a viable cap fleet size (no more 20 titan group warps or even jumps to one single cynofield)
Would give a sense of SPACE, where you crash into **** - you die, maybe your target dies too.

As for empire ganking - concord can web, slowdown, punish "speeders", damage is aggression, and should be dealt like this, also skills, modules, fields etc to dampen bumps at some places etc could maybe solve some problems with all the accidental bumps that would happen, but if a bump is at the will of the player - he should bear the consequence .
I can already think of loads of ways to tweak all this thing, make it not so deadly if accidental etc. but overall it would be a nice addition.

Christoph Rieken
Posted - 2011.01.26 20:23:00 - [2]
 

i liek dis.

Medarr
Amarr
Ghost Festival
Naraka.
Posted - 2011.01.26 20:28:00 - [3]
 

bad idea is bad...

Shields thats all i'm gonne say.

Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.01.26 21:49:00 - [4]
 

good idea, supported.

Scout lollita
Posted - 2011.01.26 22:04:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Scout lollita on 26/01/2011 22:09:58


Will only benefit high sec gankers.

Afterburn and armour tanked BS v Paper thin hauler.
Almost insta pop, without agro.
How would concord be able to tell between an inceptor trying to out run or catch war target.... and a gank bumper?

Jita 4-4 undock?
Salvagers paradise.
In such a case as Jita 4-4 undock how would we establish who intiated a bump?
GMs would be flooded by, "he did it, no he did it" reimburment petitions.

So not signed, poor balance.
Poorly thought out

SellStuff Hunny
Posted - 2011.01.26 22:19:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Scout lollita
Edited by: Scout lollita on 26/01/2011 22:09:58


Will only benefit high sec gankers.

Afterburn and armour tanked BS v Paper thin hauler.
Almost insta pop, without agro.
How would concord be able to tell between an inceptor trying to out run or catch war target.... and a gank bumper?

Jita 4-4 undock?
Salvagers paradise.
In such a case as Jita 4-4 undock how would we establish who intiated a bump?
GMs would be flooded by, "he did it, no he did it" reimburment petitions.

So not signed, poor balance.
Poorly thought out


The implementation of relative safety in empire is an open thing, but some of the moments you think are "bad" simply do not make sense:
jita 4-4? - I find it GREAT if certain measures make such a hub not only not safe to undock, but impossible outright.

somebody flygin fast like madman in empire? - gate web/damp spheres, speed "trap"... if you did not notice im FOR it if a dramiel dies while approaching gate on 13km/sec.

overall station undock thing could be redesigned, with multiple undock points, undock "lanes" etc... this would be a thing of implementation, but having 30 freighters cram out of single point and not killin a single of them in the process - no way.

Whining is not an argument, and should never be.

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.01.26 22:40:00 - [7]
 

Your idea isn't new and it's been rejected before because it is a horribly bad idea.

As for your pros(in the same order):

- Horrible solution to blobs. Getting killed because you warped as a fleet is the worst solution you could come up with. It would also kill every ship congregation, intended or accidental, so extra bad solution.

-Would solve it since they would all die at undock/dock. Again just a bad idea and getting killed by docking/undocking is even more unrealistic than being bumped by shields.

-One could, but I don't see how that would be a good thing. Either it's just a stupid way to killyourself or it's overpowered.

-Some realism, but also unrealistic, since we have shield technogy strong enough to repel nuclear missiles and anti-matter charges and so on. The ramming video during the introduction of FW was against a station with shields disabled by sabotage. Functioning shields are strong enough to repel ramming.

-Forced population reallocation because of a stupid game mechanic is bad.

As for your cons(in the same order again)

-I see you didn't bother thinking this through at all, but it reveals you willingness to ruin a lot of functioning gameplay to satisfy your little pet peeve. A reason in itself to not take your suggestions seriously.

The basic problem with this suggestion remains. It's a bad unwanted idea, that produces more issues than it solves. It doesn't add anything of real value to the game and causes a ton of problems in the process(most of your pros plus a few others).

Your own solutions to the aggression problem also doesn't actually solve anything. You still have the accidental CONCODOKKENING or suicide by ramming issue. You can mitigate it by convoluted solutions like NPC speed controls and timed docking/undocking(making things more time consuming and annoying), but that is just you basicly piling more crap on top of a huge pile of existing crap and trying to tell me the whole deal is less ****ty as a consequense. When the alternative to all that is just keeping bumping as is, this idea has no chance of ever being implemented.

Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
Posted - 2011.01.26 23:14:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: SellStuff Hunny


I think this is $h!t, and should be solved with introducing bump damage...




I wish I'd stopped here, if this is the basis of such terrible ideas, then you should have too.

Misanthra
Posted - 2011.01.26 23:35:00 - [9]
 

ccp would have to fix several things for this to not be fuster cluck.


One is fleet warpings. It laucnhes one big group, lands in one big group. Need something to spread out the landings. You mention wings....good point and I have had fc's do this. They'd put the rokhs separate from the amarr banana's...rokh has the range why have them with bs's with shorter range. Problems is these small wings would still land in a cluster. If the wing is say even 5 bombers....they could kill themselves off with that less then uber tank of theirs.


Other problem is ccp would have to get retro with the tank code and tweak active tank boosts to make it more viable to run in fleets (or nerf the buffer/passive tank to make it less desired). Game code and player choice favoers buffer tank...be alot of ships out their with no self rep abilities because of that. Only so many logi's in a fleet and they can only do so much at once.

CCP wouold also have to give ships manual control. Inty's, hacs, af's....all live and die by speed and agility. Auto orbit will have you hit stuff in crowded space since orbit at this moment is not even smart enough to know when you want to orbit you probably mean in the direction you are flying. Orbit will have turn left, right, hell you can do a complete 180 degree change of path to start the orbit. Only way to fly manual in the game is click in space. Slow, unresponsive and a pita. Inty, af or a speedy hac like vaga in an orbit turns a corner and sees they are about to hit a friendly...no effective way to avoid it. A not so mega tanked ship like an iny hits a dread, one dead inty and the dread pilot is going "dammit....I just cleaned my windshield and now I got this bugs guts splattered on it" lol.

NinjaSpud
Posted - 2011.01.27 00:19:00 - [10]
 

Supported...imagine trying to bump titans lol...squish

Alexander Vallen
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.27 03:31:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Your idea isn't new and it's been rejected before because it is a horribly bad idea.


Who else liked the idea of a Ramming module when it came up? lol

SellStuff Hunny
Posted - 2011.01.27 07:34:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Your idea isn't new and it's been rejected before because it is a horribly bad idea.


link?

As for your pros(in the same order):
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

- Horrible solution to blobs. Getting killed because you warped as a fleet is the worst solution you could come up with. It would also kill every ship congregation, intended or accidental, so extra bad solution.


I see nothing bad in having half the fleet being killed by ramming into a station, gate or another fleet, it only seems bad from this metagame point that I despise
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

-Would solve it since they would all die at undock/dock. Again just a bad idea and getting killed by docking/undocking is even more unrealistic than being bumped by shields.


undocking could be solved quite easily, just because you LOOOOve jita and this would primarily screw it up, does not make it automagically bad. I see it as a bonus for immersion.

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

-One could, but I don't see how that would be a good thing. Either it's just a stupid way to killyourself or it's overpowered.


well power and damage balance is a question of well... balance, personally I dont see a ship doing more than mass/1k or mass/10k damage before dying, AND even before exerting all damage potential, a ship should have a possibility to stop (your beloved shields)
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

-Some realism, but also unrealistic, since we have shield technogy strong enough to repel nuclear missiles and anti-matter charges and so on. The ramming video during the introduction of FW was against a station with shields disabled by sabotage. Functioning shields are strong enough to repel ramming.


strong enough to make those sieged dreads fly at 3km/s? beg your pardon...
after such flight both the flyer and the reason of the flight should at least feel a dent.

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

-Forced population reallocation because of a stupid game mechanic is bad.


and what it is now is ... not stupid? the mere fact that we all got used to it, does not make it _not_ stupid, it actually IS stupid. what is more stupid- two ships bump each other for massive amounts of joules and not feeling a dent, or two ships getting bumped by alot less (see? still we should get bump, but WITH damage) AND a red dent on shield/armor/structure, that means - "dude you should clean your windshield of bugs"
As for your cons(in the same order again)

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue

-I see you didn't bother thinking this through at all, but it reveals you willingness to ruin a lot of functioning gameplay to satisfy your little pet peeve. A reason in itself to not take your suggestions seriously.

The basic problem with this suggestion remains. It's a bad unwanted idea, that produces more issues than it solves. It doesn't add anything of real value to the game and causes a ton of problems in the process(most of your pros plus a few others).

Your own solutions to the aggression problem also doesn't actually solve anything. You still have the accidental CONCODOKKENING or suicide by ramming issue. You can mitigate it by convoluted solutions like NPC speed controls and timed docking/undocking(making things more time consuming and annoying), but that is just you basicly piling more crap on top of a huge pile of existing crap and trying to tell me the whole deal is less ****ty as a consequense. When the alternative to all that is just keeping bumping as is, this idea has no chance of ever being implemented.

despite your thought, I've been through thinking a lot about it, I never said that my "solutions" should be final or anything, a lot of your so called problems, are mere metagaming things that you, and many others, would like to keep, apparently we do not share this PoW. Also I am reaching character limit Rolling Eyes


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only