A Modest Proposal

I’d be very interested to see the effect on EVE highSec play if it was possible for players to buy a service not unlike “negative insurance” from CONCORD that allowed them to completely destroy their ship and its contents whenever they liked.

IMO the “correct” price for this would be about 20% of the market value of the ship and it’s contents (so hitting the “self-destruct” button would cost 120% of the ISK value of the ship + contents.

I’d expect this to have a significant positive effect on PvP. It certainly would for me.

1 Like

Oops I see.

Yo got off to a bad start there /lol.

You can’t reasonably call self-destruction with a negative premium “risk averse”.

What it does is influence where the decision to PvP or not is taken. It’s largely one-sided in highSec at the moment, and the game strongly favors attacking with overwhelming force. Removing the salvage income would share the “balance of power” ore evenly between attack and defense.

How so? Loot drops are a motivator for PvP activity. How would removing a reason to shoot ships improve PvP?

You know, you already can jettison your stuff and shoot the jetcan if you really want to deny loot to someone.


This would generate a massive isk faucet as well making the inflation problem even worse.

1 Like

If I destroyed my ship this way, I’d lose the value of the ship and everything in it PLUS the “self-destruct button premium” - an additional 20%

Personally, I would do this in a second if attacked by gankers. I’d happily play a 50% negative premium for the self-destruct button.

1 Like

Yea I see now I read it wrong but yea, jettison shoot can is the best you can go for unless your in a freighter.

The old self destruct mechanic did just this. To this day I still don’t understand why it was changed.


Better would be an item you buy from the station, rigged explosives, you keep them in your cargo hold and as soon as your ship get’s shot it explode’s destroying your own ship + cargo.

Which means you can deni ganker’s loot but at the risk of someone finding out and killing you with a noob ship some trade off :].

I guess you can put the explosives in a cargo container so it can’t be scanned but then most people will gang you if you have one so that’s another trade off :smiley:

1 Like

I changed the original a bit - now it reads “negative insurance”.

In my defense, I considered that when I was drafting the first post, but actually it’s insurance and gambling that are (more or less) mutual opposites, so I decided to go with just “insurance”. Anyway it was the wrong choice - sorry! .

1 Like

Lol no worries was a bit confusing xD but understandable now.

This would mostly destroy “stuff”, not ISK - the loss of ISK would only be the “negative insurance” premium.

I don’t think it would have a big effect overall, but if it did it would be to increase the demand for raw materials. IMO it would be good for the EVE economy overall.

BTW I’ve never looked at where ISK enters/leaves the game. If you know. please post it here.

Check out the monthly financial report’s, isk is born in goon space with all the ratting super’s and finally makes its way to low sec where all the action happens where it lies down to die :smiley: joking but yea still look at the monthly financial reports.

In most MMOs (all that I’ve played), game currency is generated as rewards for high-end PvE activities.

Raw material mining, manufacturing, and trading facilitate moving the game currency around, but don’t add or subtract it. Getting rewards in the firm of in-game items (salvage, faction modules etc), like mining, just adds something that may cause in-game currency to be moved around.

In my limited experience, the sinks have mainly been things that players buy from “the game” with game currency.

I’ve played something like six month’s worth of EVE, but mostly for two to four weeks at a time, so I’ve never done high-income PvE, nor bought anything more expensive from the market than a Gnosis. It hasn’t provided me with complete or broad insight into the economy :slight_smile:

Do you remember that time well enough to compare highSec PvP then and now?
I know this change would make me PvP a lot more (assuming I was playing of course), but I’m not a typical EVE player, so I can’t extrapolate from my own attitudes.

An amusing suggestion, but no. Ganking in eve is a good place apart from the bumping part of it.

However if you had a bump counter that once it went over 20 bumps per session that you could do such a self destruct if you wanted until your next session change then bumping would be solved as an issue.

Made me smile.


i frequently rant about it comparisons between hi-sec pvp then and now.

But the way self destruct works is a small (near negligible) factor in that regard.

It was just more interesting to me when self destruct could be used as a way to force your enemies to race against the timer to kill you for your loot.

I think the ability to destroy loot drop would crimp the ganking of freighters.

Might manage to stomp out highsec PvP entirely.

That’s great for the game, maybe.


Yep, that was good. I suppose I could define that as a buff to ganking too.

1 Like

If it was instant it would be too easy.

But if a freighter is being held in space and knows it has zero chance of getting out, like when it’s bumped by gankers, it would be interesting if it could initiate a self destruct sequence that takes however long but leaves nothing behind, not even a salvageable wreck.

I very much doubt that will make ganking impossible. When I’ve watched gankers at work, many freighters are destroyed well within a few minutes and i don’t think it’d be so bad to give gankers a race against time.

1 Like