As stated multiple times in your arguments, the end results are what you are using to justify the point. So the details are irrelevant to the argument. You even went so far as to pull in potentially neutral unrelated players into the mix and labeled it as the same thing to justify and punctuate, that the details do not matter.
You have eliminated your own argument, the details do not matter… well done?
I’m not sure why you keep repeating this. How is it anti-ganking’s fault (or anyone else’s, for that matter) all the nonsense that @DrysonBennington keeps posting in these forums?
And even if his posts made sense (CCP may very well end up eventually introducing such a time limit to the inability to warp while bumped, you know), it’s only natural for anyone thinking there is some imbalance or broken mechanic to also believe that imbalance is precisely what prevents anti-ganking from being effective…
Not to mention nobody is obliged to be able to save those freighters from being suicide ganked in the first place…
I mean
It’s ag
It’s their fault if freighters keep dying all over the place 
What makes sense is that the gankers only ploy is too to try and appeal to the money sink that they create with their ganks that because of the extreme loss of ISK due to their ganks players are more likely to pay real money to replace their losses with.
The above statement is the only reason that CODE views their existence as making any type of sense. They want to believe that they are doing something beneficial for the game, actively ganking which causes hundreds of billions in ISK to be remade.
CODE wants to believe that it is creating ‘jobs’ because of their ganks which equates to a rationale of being a destructive force that only does good for the manufacturing industry of the game.
The fact is that the game would continue forward without any problems at if CODE never even existed or if ganking was completely banned in High Sec.
Criminals always use the excuse of the truth of the matter as not making sense when it comes to crimes.
Only a criminal would say that the details don’t matter or someone who doesn’t have a chance in the Universe in proving their case correct and winning.
Shooting ships isn’t an ISK sink. Never has been. Never will be.
It’s an ISK faucet through insurance.
So you have this completely backwards. There is no extreme loss of ISK when a ship blows up. Not a single ISK is lost.
I’d love to know whether this is how you genuinely are or it’s that you’re drunk or on drugs or whatnot when you post…
The Details -
Estuary Algaert you re doing nothing more than spinning words and phrases in different orders to try and create something relevance.
I know that details are the most important evidence in any case because I went through a workers compensation claim where the employer used baseless facts to try and sway the judge to their side. One detail was that the employer tried to say that I hadn’t accepted light duty work that had been within the doctors work restrictions as a reason that I should be be denied my compensation.
The fact is that the employer changed the medical determination to wording that favored their argument or they at least tried too. But what it boiled down to was that I wasn’t even on light duty, I was on work restrictions pending the Ortho’s evaluation, which the employer knew about because the employer had access to the same documents that the doctor gave to me and yet the employer still tried to claim that I was on light duty when they knew that I wasn’t.
Not to mention that the employer did not provide the DETAILS of the work to be performed that I would needed to have read and agreed to and then signed as having been in receipt of the light duty work that would have satisfied what type of work could be performed within the original physicians
determination that related to work restrictions pending the ortho’s evaluation.
Other nonsense that the employer tried to throw at me was that I didn’t call their company to let them know that I had been injured as well as not calling the employer asking for light duty work when I still wasn’t on light duty.
Once again I beat their nonsense by producing my phone logs from the very beginning of working for the employer to the very last day working with the employer. My call logs even showed that I had called the employer at least 12 times and that the employer had only called me twice, once after I had called the employer and left a message.
The employer even tried to use the evidence of my own call logs against me by trying to flip it around by saying that they had called me 12 times and that I had only called them twice.
Both mine and their phone records proved my accounts of having called them numerous times asking for work within the doctors work restrictions was proven correct and that they had only called me one time since the beginning of the date of the injury to the very last day that I worked for them.
Needless to say I won every single appeal that the employer tried to use to keep me from getting my workers compensation.
Why? Because of the details that I laid out before the hearing officer that disposed everything that they tried to appeal the case with while absolutely proving everything that I was asked with detailed documentation.
The last hearing of the appeal
There was outcry from everyone in the hearing room, even from my own lawyer which added to the overall good feeling, when the employer had stated that I had been working for the company while receiving workers compensation and that I was committing fraud.
I pulled out my bank statements from the beginning of the year that I had gone through and highlighted every date that I had been paid and assertively tossed them onto the table in front of the employer’s rep and laywer. I got rebuked for it. The room was loud with the hearing officer reprimanding me, their lawyer getting turse with me and my lawyer and the workers comp. coordinator saying that I shouldn’t do things like that.
The person to have the last laugh was the security guard that everyone could hear laughing after the the fox had ran through the chicken coup.
I even highlighted the dates that the employer said I was working and receiving a paycheck while receiving compensation benefits…of which was proven untrue again and that I hadn’t been working on any date while receiving compensation and hadn’t been committing any fraud like the employer tried to twist around the entire case…just like every single one of you is trying to do.
The comment below is the same nonsense that the workers compensation coordinator and the employers BWC lawyer tried to used. Twisting everything around because they knew that they had nothing but had to say something.
As stated multiple times in your arguments, the end results are what you are using to justify the point. So the details are irrelevant to the argument. You even went so far as to pull in potentially neutral unrelated players into the mix and labeled it as the same thing to justify and punctuate, that the details do not matter.
** You have eliminated your own argument, the details do not matter… well done?**
I have spent the last 3 to 4 months studying law and tactics in order to defeat their appeal. The employers most recent appeal was so heinous that the top level hearing officer in charge refused to even consider the appeal. Not to mention being involved in another BWC case back in 2012 that I lost because I didn’t have a lawyer.
With that in mind I have a good seven to eight month experience base of knowing that details and documentation will defeat any claims that the other side might try and throw up without them having details of their own to prove their accusations with.
Since no one here is able to rebuttal the following details below with nothing more than personal attacks and twisting the Gankers have lost their case…wheres the detailed documentation to refute the below statement of detailed facts?
Semantics and having more people saying something does not in fact create truth.
How Bumping and Warp Scrambling are different mechanics with the same end result
Bumping is a transfer of Kinetic energy between the Bump ship and the target that effectively disrupts the ships ability to align to a warp to point in space to warp. Basically the gyroscope mechanism of the align computer system is kept ajar so that the ship is not able to warp to a warp to point.
Warp Scrambling is a transfer of EMP energy from the attacking ship to the targeted ship that disrupts the warp computer and its components directly in such a manner that the information passed between the warp drive controls and the warp engines is jarred so that the information does not complete its sequence of commands much the same as a fragmented sentence.
Regardless of either Kinetic or EMP the process remains the same in that the ship is not able to align to warp out to a locked on target.
One form of disruption, Bumping , disrupts the align to the locked on target, the other, Warp Disruption , keeps the ship from actually warping. Since the alignment of the ship is tied directly into both systems a Kinetic attack on the ship is the same as an EMP attack on the ship as either or both breaks the ability of the ship to enter warp.
Since warp scrambling is a criminal offense in High Sec while a ship is not under a war dec, Bumping should also be considered a criminal offense in High Sec as well while a ship is not under a war dec.
The only real recourse for the ship being bumped is too either have a 3 minute warp timer that would still allow a gank to possibly take place as well as the freighter being able to warp out and not be perma warp scrambled using a Kinetic energy transfer to activate the scramble or that the freighter should be given a mid slot in order to fit a Freighter Jump Drive Engine that will allow the freighter to jump free of the gank in any direction while still allowing the gankers to attempt the gank.
But as I have stated Bumping is no different than warp scrambling because both effect the warp drive functions of a ship with the same result of denying the ship being bumped or scrambled to enter warp.
Since warp scrambling is a criminal offense in High Sec then bumping should be viewed as an exploit meant to avoid the consequences of keeping a ship from entering into warp in High Sec by not using a warp scrambler wherein the same results are achieved as using a warp scrambler but without CONCORD intervening.
Where are the Gankers details, such as I have submitted above, that would refute what I am stating is in fact factual and truthful based in detailed form?
Wrong, the ISK value that the player has either converted from real money into ISK or the ISK value of the in-game currency has been lost.
Dryson, you need to go back and do your math.
Let’s say you sell a PLEX for 1.5 Billion and then purchase a Freighter from me for that same amount.
I now have the 1.5 Billion ISK.
You then fly the Freighter through Uedama and get blown up. Whether you insured or didn’t insure, you get an insurance payout.
Now, I still have the 1.5 Billion and you have a couple of hundred million and the total ISK increased.
No ISK was lost and some ISK was created.
Scipio Artelius, you can’t argue anything because your points have already been proven wrong and that what you are doing is nothing more than trying to deflect away to some irrelevant tangent that others will try and expand on hoping that others will get entangled in the word jibber that you have created.
Wrong, you still lose ISK because the insurance is an estimated value and is not based on the market value.
Platinum Insurance Payout for a Navy Vexor is around 9.5 mil approx. You will never pay anything less than 60 mil for a Navy Vexor so there is ISK loss. The only way that you don’t lose any money on the insurance is if you mine the minerals and build the ship yourself.
So your comment is irrelevant.
There isn’t. If you paid 60 million for the VNI, whoever you paid that to, has that ISK.
You gain the asset and they gain the ISK.
You might feel poorer if that VNI gets destroyed, but no ISK is lost.
Insurance is an ISK faucet, so the ISK increases in the game. It isn’t lost and when a ship is destroyed, the player’s wallet increases, not decreases. There is no way that ISK is lost when a ship blows up.
No you lost the ISK because you did not manufacture and build the VNI yourself.
Warp Scrambling in High Sec not under a war dec is a legal offense that results in a punishment because the targeted has been denied the ability to enter into warp on legal terms associated with warp scrambling.
How is Bump Tackling any different than using a Warp Scrambler to deny a ship the ability to enter warp?
Because if people like Dryson where actually good at the game he would have enough fun actually playing the game. But all he does is crying on the forums to get the game changed in an attempt to remove something he thinks will hurt the people he doesn’t like. It is quite literally one of the lowest points you can sink to as a gamer.
It’s not that he really cares about bumping. It’s just that he thinks he found and argument that sounds good in his head and now he tries to convince other people that this is actually a thing. Which it clearly isn’t and it’s also completely useless to explain that to him because he will not understand it and just keep writing the same thing like a broken record.
So this is why this thread and any thread like it is a testament to the constant failing of ag. Because if they where any good they would have fun ingame and not try to cheat by manipulating at the meta game level.
Bumping does not disable the warpdrive you can still warp in the direction you are aligned.
You’re talking to him as if you thought he understands the concepts he uses in his posts. He doesn’t.
He doesn’t understand what an ISK sink is in the first place, which is why he cannot understand your explanation no matter how hard you try…
And it’s the same when he talks about “exploits” and nearly everything else. It’s why trying to make sense of his posts and explain things to him is so pointless. He can’t understand them, he really can’t…
No, I am addressing an issue that allows gankers to circumvent the rules of denying a ship entry into warp that should be addressed.
You are crying because if you didn’t have your gank alts to gank with using the Bump Tackling technique then you would have to go into Low and Null and PvP to make the same ISK.
bumping is not denying the ship entry into warp. It can warp perfectly fine in the direction it is facing. You just have to find some object or another ship to warp to.
The only one crying here is you because you are too bad to do something about the gankers in the game and get your teeth kicked in at every possible occasion,
I obviously can make sense of my posts which is the reason why you continue to say the opposite because you wan’t everyone to think otherwise.
If what I am saying is wrong then why can’t you counter it with any detailed facts?
Saying the same thing over and over again hoping that your perceived status or the fact that you might war dec someone who doesn’t agree with you will convert them to your side disproves what I am saying below:
How Bumping and Warp Scrambling are different mechanics with the same end result
Bumping is a transfer of Kinetic energy between the Bump ship and the target that effectively disrupts the ships ability to align to a warp to point in space to warp. Basically the gyroscope mechanism of the align computer system is kept ajar so that the ship is not able to warp to a warp to point.
Warp Scrambling is a transfer of EMP energy from the attacking ship to the targeted ship that disrupts the warp computer and its components directly in such a manner that the information passed between the warp drive controls and the warp engines is jarred so that the information does not complete its sequence of commands much the same as a fragmented sentence.
Regardless of either Kinetic or EMP the process remains the same in that the ship is not able to align to warp out to a locked on target.
One form of disruption, Bumping , disrupts the align to the locked on target, the other, Warp Disruption , keeps the ship from actually warping. Since the alignment of the ship is tied directly into both systems a Kinetic attack on the ship is the same as an EMP attack on the ship as either or both breaks the ability of the ship to enter warp.
Since warp scrambling is a criminal offense in High Sec while a ship is not under a war dec, Bumping should also be considered a criminal offense in High Sec as well while a ship is not under a war dec.
The only real recourse for the ship being bumped is too either have a 3 minute warp timer that would still allow a gank to possibly take place as well as the freighter being able to warp out and not be perma warp scrambled using a Kinetic energy transfer to activate the scramble or that the freighter should be given a mid slot in order to fit a Freighter Jump Drive Engine that will allow the freighter to jump free of the gank in any direction while still allowing the gankers to attempt the gank.
But as I have stated Bumping is no different than warp scrambling because both effect the warp drive functions of a ship with the same result of denying the ship being bumped or scrambled to enter warp.
Since warp scrambling is a criminal offense in High Sec then bumping should be viewed as an exploit meant to avoid the consequences of keeping a ship from entering into warp in High Sec by not using a warp scrambler wherein the same results are achieved as using a warp scrambler but without CONCORD intervening.
Where are the Gankers details, such as I have submitted above, that would refute what I am stating is in fact factual and truthful based in detailed form?
Are you aware of the fact that it is against the forum rules to discuss exploits? You should just create a petition and let ISD close the thread. Except of course if you don’t actually think this is an exploit and therefor your post is fine.