Ya it’s not and you do need to be careful. There are some good ones though and you just need some patients and good common sense when reading ads or replies.
It’s like anything, people tend to make it better or worse so, invest wisely. GL.
EDIT
If you are into HS, I suggest a long established noob-friendly corp as not only will it be low key but your experience will also help new players which is rewarding…I hear.
Ye-es. That could well be an issue. Some alpha locks me in a velator and I just make like a lemming off a cliff.
“Instantaneous” in this case could be a two-edge sword. I would be happy if it was still a countdown, but one where it could at least feasibly go off during a gank - like 5- 10 secs.
Life, the whole point of a game is a break from life… Life would be if you came home and found out someone had broken in to your house, stolen all your stuff, and took a dump on your child’s bed, and after calling the police, the officer smiles and tells you that your neighbor declared war… so you know… no harm no foul… you obviously had a choice not to go to work so your neighbor couldn’t take your stuff, your fault.
You should not ever equate game and life, they aren’t supposed to be similar, or games like second life would be WAY more popular.
“You don’t want your stuff taken, don’t collect stuff” seems to be a popular phrase of those who thinks guns are the best stuff to collect.
The spaceship version mental image is rather funny…
It definitely is my intention for spaceships. If I self-destruct, you get loot.
With structures, I am having an each-way bet. I would like to be able to loot my own structure (which is more related to potential options for timing of self-destruct). However, I would still welcome the “going down with the ship” routine.
But this is a sandbox, not Monopoly. YOU do not dictate the rules and how everyone else must to play.
So when I say “that’s life”, what I’m saying is that in this type of environment, you need to use some life skills such as common sense. For example, if a deal is too good to be true, it’s probably a scam. That works both here and in the real world.
I’m not saying they are the same and/or should be treated the same…just that as the sim level increases, so does the need to use more real world skills (and just like IRL, you should be trying to improve those skills, not ask for the bar to be lowered at every turn).
You see! CONTENT.
(And you thought us care bears were just people to be laughed at.)
You just made the point of the OP… The rules are made, and made to a point the very heavily favors an aggressor who has every opportunity to deny satisfaction to someone weaker than them, without even a slim chance of returning satisfaction denial… The OP clearly says that the ability to self destruct the structure would not have left the other players in a disgruntled state…
All that was asked for was an ability to deny the aggressor some reward for their work, to equalize the rewards being taken from them.
CONCORD will protect you in hisec…unless you own property… and unless someone stronger than you declares in a written manner that they intend to take your stuff…
You know what, I’d even be happy if the aggressors took a security standing hit for declaring war in hisec, cause what other purpose of 140 ongoing wars is there besides chaos and destruction.
No I did not make the point of the OP as I am against changing the rules…
The stronger always have an advantage over the weaker in a symmetrical fight. That pretty much a law of nature. If you don’t want to be prey then don’t be a juicy target. It really is that simple. I have a Rait far off the beaten path, hidden as best as possible and totally empty (and advertised as such) so that bashers will ignore…it’s worked so far for months so…
But what the OP wants is to have it both ways. To have all the benefits of owning a station but also a NEW deterrent for the predators so they would be less likely to be attacked in the first place. Denying a reward is a deterrent. Why would a fox chase a rabbit if there was a good chance the rabbit would self-destruct when caught (I lol’ed at that mental image too)(I crack me up).
WARDECS are another issue and a total Sh|tshow right now so…CCP really borked that one.
I pretty much support this point of view. All I want is a greater ability to be passive aggressive in response. And self-destruct is just being one way to do that.
It’s still fighting back, just in a way that will annoy “traditional” PvP players. Which again is surely a “very Eve” way of doing it?
EDIT: it’s not changing the rules, it’s just changing the balance.
Fighting back it to use EWAR and make it as painfully slow as possible for the attacker…this is just being a sore loser IMO.
EDIT: it’s not changing the rules, it’s just changing the balance.
Well considering the rules would have to be changed…but I digress…
I take both points.
Did you read the same post? The OP asks for the ability for a structure to defend itself (Did NOT ask to be made immune to a fight) and barring that asked for the ability to reduce being a target by reducing rewards without risk to an aggressor (by adding risk of gaining nothing after time spent).
Every one is in a hurry to bury their neighbor here, it’s kinda sad… and explains a lot towards the state of the game.
Risk here equates to the risk a MMA fighter has at a PvP preschool… I mean PvP is allowed…so risk right!
Look, we can meet halfway.
You can self-destruct, but doing so disables asset safety.
Sure I mean the owner has like a week worth of vulnerability cycles to clear out the stuff.
That’s an interesting middle ground. But…
I’m also okay with that.
#chaosera
Contract third party to haul stuff out…
So lily agrees with one side, Runa never agrees with any side and haula agrees to every side… and none of it matters a bit since I think all the community managers have already quit or have been let go…or been let go after having quit.
They already can…not well mind you but that’s by design. Having them more powerful just means bigger fleets will be used and then you’ll want more power and then even bigger fleets…bla bla bla…
we don’t even have the ability to self destruct the thing
This is what is being discussed here ATM, not the “more power” option…feel free though to open that can of worms…
Risk here equates to the risk a MMA fighter has at a PvP preschool
Again, if you put up a station, you face new challenges. If you can deal with those challenges then you better find a way to OR come to peace that you might lose the station one day. If you are weak, don’t try and fight a pro MMA fighter…stay out of the ring. Don’t ask Dana White to hamstring the Pro so you will have a better chance.