I am well aware of that.
I wasn’t the resident outlaw of Hek for no reason.
It’s what I do. Ask Pedro.
No, really … go and ask him about it.
Again… we need to find a time when we can fly together.
Also: Balos alt detected in this thread.
1 Like
The people who want to deny gankers profts want it purely out of selfish motives. They want to hurt the ganker and ganking as a whole. This idea is nonsense and deserves no attention. No one is being helped by this, at all.
You can read it in their posts. They’re completely unaware of their lack of self responsibility and see denial of income (not loot/salvage. income!) as the only “defense”, or hitting back. It’s not one, or the other, though.
They’re not hitting back, and they have no intention of hitting back. Instead they ask for a way to punish a player who does nothing wrong. Tell me a single other part of the game, where it is possible to deny someone his income by pressing a button. There isn’t.
I can steal your loot, but it takes far more than just a button press.
I can blow you up before you can grab your loot, but it takes more than just a button to press.
I can blow you up after the fact, but it not only takes more than just a button, it wouldn’t even be “denying you income” anymore.
These people are malicious.
This idea is bad, and born out of hate.
They wish for a way to harm those they can not beat by legitimate in-game ways, simply because they refuse to do so.
And so I ask:
Why should someone, who refuses to put any effort into his game, get an easy way of influencing another player’s experience dramatically?
That other player can be evaded with tank and carefulness, has to deal with potentially everyone on grid, perpetually gets hunted by the faction police, isn’t even guaranteed to get good drops anyway and, after all of that, has to suffer from an effective fifteen minute timeout even if he fails to achieve his goal!
Even if he tagged himself up, he would still need to be able to bear the cost for the tags. He still needs to scan your ship, still needs to have everything set up, still needs to spend the time waiting for a target that potentially pays off.
This idea is ■■■■ and those who propose it are full of it.
/thread.
3 Likes
You would have fit in with my crew.
We were all fun, all chaos, all the time.
Great stories, though… back when people
played Eve for fun instead of just Isk.
1 Like
- You need to stop living in the past.
- You need to join us.
Good night! 
Sure, but only if the pirate can scan the cargo/fitting and see the module. Otherwise the deterrent factor is at the group level.
I still think it would be rarely used. Your fitting should be designed to avoid dying, not planning for the event of your explosion. Those looking to lay a trap that involves your bait ship exploding have better options.
This just proves you’re affected by the communication issue I mentioned earlier /lol.
You must have seen the counter-arguments to your eccentric and wildly inconsistent claims many times. And you must know you are using exactly the same arguments your supposed “opposition” uses.
Since you’re prepared to do this in writing (/lol) I know there’s no point in my explaining what’s going on, but I will “state the obvious”:
My motivation for wanting to have (but pay for in-game) an effective “self-destruct button” is exactly the same as a ganker’s motivation for initiating one-sided PvP.
I get that you can’t see this, but if you have questions that can be answered in a time-efficient way I’ll respond.
1 Like
Aren’t gankers already fighting against the CONCORD timer? Who is this module for? Freighter pilots who are being bumped so that they can get on with their lives if they want to take a 120% hit to their finances to give up?
I am having trouble seeing this as anything but a passive aggressive expression of spite that doesn’t really make anyone happy.
What little ganking that happens is the only reason to consider your fits and tactics for shipping. This threat is what makes industries like PushX and Redfrog attractive. It’s not out of hand, and it doesn’t need to be fixed.
To get freighters that were going to blow up anyway to blow up more quickly so their pilots can do something else, delete FacPo.
Instant would be game breaking.
1 Like
Qia
I suggest it’s unwise to look into the motives of EVE PvPers. Including that “passive aggressive” approach.
If you give me a clear explanation of why so many EVE players enjoy one-sided PvP in highSec I’ll provide some context.
BTW - I’m perfectly capable of providing such information directly, but I know (99.9% confidence) from an earlier check that it would be a waste of effort. Someone (almost certainly not you) would start “creatively reinterpreting” it, as we’ve already seen in this thread, and it would turn out to be a waste of time.(
BTW - I’ve noticed an unjustified shift on context: “everyone” is suddenly pretend this is only about freighters. I know you didn’t originate it, but it’s just “EVE forum spin”. If you want an example ship that’s consistent with one of my posts in this thread, go with a T1/T1 PvE Vexor.
Wow your fighting hard to keep ccp from nerfing your ez income source 
ganging high sec is probably the easiest thing in the game to do to get kill’s.
1 Like
What effect would it have on the game?
What would be lost? What would be gained?
BTW:
I don’t think you initiated the “it’s all about freighters” spin either, but it’s obvious nonsense. The game can easily handle any case(s) of ships that shouldn’t have a self-destruct button.
You are just another one of those entitled carebears, who want to nerf others play styles to compensate for your own laziness and ignorance.
Just leave the game, if you are not willing to adapt.
Tipa
Seriously?
“Nerf others’ play styles”?
This won’t stop anyone PvPing,
Even today, nothing can force someone to actively defend themselves against gankers, so it won’¨t change the range of options either side has during the fight.
If this “play style” is based on looting after a gank, it’s not PvP, it’s farming. If that’s what you’re defending, just say so … but then you’ll have to edit out that “carebear” bit won’t you?
1 Like
You perfectly know, that people gank and fight for loot/profit. Giving the potential victim an option to reliably deny the loot, would kill the ganker profession and motivations to fight … exactly what you want, lazy, ignorant carebear.
Shut up, Balos. There is no ground to ask for such a feature,
and it would never see the light of the day,
because there are no actual arguments for it.
Those who ask for it do nothing for themselves, so they will get exactly what they put into it.
What I know is that some PvPers fight for loot and profit some of the time. But if that’s all they do, they are farmers, not PvPers.
Since you’re speaking for those ones, it seems you’re the carebear.
I also know that some PvPers fight when there is no possibility of loot or profit. These ones won’t mind if their target explodes a bit earlier than expected.
1 Like
He’s also a re-definer of definitions.
1 Like
Yes, for killmails.
Just shut up, carebear.
1 Like
Despite the propaganda against people like me by CODE and their forum flunkies I believe that ganking is part of the game, my issue has always been about correct game balance. My issue with bumping on freighters is that there is no real counter. Actions need rewards, if it was instant then freighter ganking would not happen and I cannot support that.
What would happen is that the ganks would focus more on the newer people running around with basic transport ships who would not have the time to hit self-destruct.
In terms of other impacts the most important would be players who PvP and pay for it with the drops from their opponents.
I don’t believe that freighters, Orcas and Bowheads should be effectively safe like that because to gank them requires people to be able to pay for what they need and this being instant would wipe that out. It would turn gankers into AG players in that any real effective play would be a definite loss. So they will not do it unless it was something like Burn Jita funded by larger wallets and perhaps targeted hits on other alliances logistics…, that does sound better in one sense lol.
I look at the bumping mechanic as an issue because within the game most players in a freighter have a simple choice when their scout sees a Mach on the gate and that is to dock up and log off.
What would be lost is the challenge of and the play needed to get your stuff safely to and from market. What would be gained is that people would be able to set an alt off on auto pilot and play the game in more fun areas rather then having to nurse a slow warping whale through hisec.
Despite the flunkies attitude to me I think it would make Eve less.
PS They are getting very personal against you which means that they cannot counter your arguments. Also expect them to go off on tangents and hammer it until you are utterly bored of them.
Hey maybe he has multiple personalities.
1 Like