It would not. You again don’t know what you are talking about.
CODE already brings these numbers to kill freighters with similar HP. It would not change a thing. And neither would time limited bumping as people in the past did not even need to bump in order to gank a freighter. They just attacked them with the same number of pilots that are now being used to gank them.
Only one thing has changed: CFC and CODE established a botting aspect to ganking and that aspect requires bumping to work.
Why would I biomass? That’s idiotic.
So? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. The usual whine threads are stupid because they’re thinly veiled demands for 100% safety and 100% profit for carebears. Rather than use the already-available tools, available even to solo players, they insist that they need more safety and refuse to use common-sense options like not putting excessive value in a single ship.
In this case the complaint is correct however: bumping should not be a permanent state with no possible resolution for a solo player. If the bumping player has no ability to make a genuine attack, doing more than annoying their victim out of sheer spite, then eventually the inconvenience should end (much like being able to mute an annoying person on voice chat). A 5-minute timer that makes you automatically enter warp at the end accomplishes the goal of preventing trolls from perma-bumping a player just to be obnoxious while doing nothing to provide safety to the idiots who overload their floating loot crates and autopilot obliviously into gank systems. A competent and organized gank squad can still bump the target to prevent their escape and then deliver a fatal attack.
So adding more fitting options wouldn’t allow higher EHP?
The same can be said about your argumentation.
Yeah sure. It’s easy to trade insults. Rarely useful, but you don’t seem to ever make a reasonable argument, so it’s no surprise that it often ends up at insults.
No, have you lived under a rock? When CCP gave freighters more fitting options, the reduced the base HP of the ship. The Bowhead has fittings and the same HP and EHP as a tanked freighter. That will happen again when they give freighters fittings like the Bowhead. That’s a historic fact.
Sorry, not sorry, but when I throw all my reasonable and factually proven arguments against your brickwall of ignorance and incompetence, I let myself lose temper sometimes to spice things up for me. You ignore every factual and reasonable argument that I bring forth, hence I take the liberties of calling out your incompetence however I like to. Even when I insult you, I still keep using factually proven and reasonable arguments, while you do nothing but spouting biased and false CFCODE propaganda. And you spam every thread with your factually wrong assumptions and arguments to drive actually correct and relevant arguments out of the view of potential readers so that they only see your rambling.
For every bleeding heart that whines for more safety for them and less for others, there’s a counter argument.
Those counter views and opinions are just as valid to express.
It doesn’t invalidate the counter arguments. They are all ok and nothing I write is more important than what someone else writes that differs to my view. By the same respect, my view is no less important than those arguments either.
They are all valid and as these threads are always polarised, they are often extreme views.
Over a forum thread? That’s a bit sad really, but more power to you.
Over the sheer amount of ignorance and incompetence that is concentrated in some people. More power to you, though, so that I don’t have to deal with more people like that elsewhere.
Like claiming it only takes 6 ships to gank a fully tanked freighter. Like claiming that providing fitting options to freighters won’t allow them to have increased EHP?
That is what you claim. I have never claimed that. I claimed that you do not need 20 people or “massive fleets” by showing you fully tanked freighters that die easily to 11 characters. You are lying again like in the respective thread to flood threads with more useless rabble.
The Bowhead with its fitting capabilities is proof that this is the case. For the rest: See above.
Yep you did:
Conveniently your screenshot omit your quote where you say you need 20 people or “massive fleets”. What a coincidence, isn’t it?
Actually, go quote where I wrote that a massive fleet was needed?
You won’t be able to, because I’ve never written that.
And in relation to the 20 ships statement, I think I was pretty specific with that being true for some situations. I never claimed all.
So go ahead, go quote what I wrote.
Here, I think this one right:
No, you were not specific that it’s for some. Your sentence indicates that you think all fully tanked freighters need more than 20 chars to gank them. Which is factually wrong and you keep lying about it.
It even says it right in the part you’ve screen shot.
They aren’t gankable with 6 characters. In some cases it’s upwards of 20 characters to gank them.
Right, my bad. The point is, however, that you do not need more than 20 chars at all in the main gank systems to gank even tanked freighters. In no circumstances. They do not pose massive EHP barriers for small groups to overcome. They only pose massive EHP barriers for botting armies to overcome.
Rubbish in no circumstances.
Jita is one of the main gank systems (1.5% of all ganks occur in Jita, by contrast Uedama is the most frequent gank system at 8.8% of ganks). In Jita, it is absolutely necessary in some situations to need upwards of 20 gank ships.
In other cases, even in Uedama, upwards of 20 ships may be required. For example, if the gank fleet is all catalysts, it will be more than 20 ships to gank a fully tanked Obelisk. Even with bombers, I think it might be above 20, but would need to do the calculations to confirm.
So absolutely, in some situations upwards of 20 gank ships are required to affect a gank, even in the main gank systems.
The most common gank fleet size is 11. But that is mostly against antitanked and completely untanked freighters.
