If you can’t see it in this thread, and those other ones from the years gone by, then no explanation I will ever give you will make up for your blindness, wilful or otherwise. I’m not here to pick a fight with you, Salvos. I’m telling you this idea comes up time and again from carebears who can’t see beyond the last mining barge or freighter they lost and would rather have CCP deal with their personal problems than deal with it themselves.
1 Like
That’s a facile response.
Explain why carebears would pick up the ramming argument, again, despite it being against their own interest.
Im not a carebear, yet I took it up.
Carebears want safety / protection.
Carebears don’t like being bumped by Machariels who can do it all day with immunity from damage and impunity from the law.
Carebears will assume that if said Machariel is unable to bump, because bumping is now ramming, and ramming hurts the nasty Machariel and makes it explode if it does it too much, that ramming brings increased safety.
Carebears will also assume that if said Machariel goes Suspect for ramming, that someone will shoot it and make the nasty thing go away.
This is Carebear 101.
6 Likes
Would you like me to explain why water is wet while I’m at it? I shouldn’t have to explain what is plain as day and common knowledge. Stop baiting for a fight, and go get a hobby.
This is going nowhere.
Refuse to answer.
Thats fine.
Ive already dropped the proposal due to BPs post.
Of course it’s going nowhere. You’re asking a facile question and getting bent out of shape when you get answered in kind.
You refused to answer a simple, direct question.
Thats all there is to it, Remiel.
Thats fine.
Im not going to press you for it.
You made your choice.
This is going nowhere.
Go ahead and have your last word.
- Shouldn’t be autopiloting anyway
- Working As Intended™
- Giggity
- CCPlease
- Pretty much
It was a stupid question, but actually, I did answer it. Your ignorance/rejection of that answer is your problem, but it’s also how I know you’re just picking another fight for the sake of having a fight.
The fact is, it happened right here in this thread. Why don’t you ask that carebear why they brought it up, instead of me. I can tell you why I brought it up in 2012. Because I didn’t understand EVE.
1 Like
All this talk of ramming makes me want to log in for a nice round of space pinball. Come on, Salvos, don’t give up so easily. This ramming idea of yours would generate more tears than bumping ever could…
Apparently its not popular, and for some inexplicable reason considered a carebear idea.
Im out.
Try arguing it with the others here.
That’s because it is a carebear idea, and I was being facetious…
2 Likes
Good job.
Babis first troll.
A facetious poster.
Surely we all admire them and need more of them.
Right?
PS: That is sarcasm.
Hey, it’s not my fault you can’t see the flawed premise in your “original” idea. Doesn’t matter to me either way. Ramming would actually benefit me even more than bumping, because it would allow me to take out ships solo that I never would be able to otherwise. For example, in that mining blob pic I posted eariler, that guy’s Orca and Skiffs are tanked for the end of the world. Normally there’s no way in hell I would be able to take any of them out unless I had a fleet of a couple hundred ships at my disposal, which I do not.
So, with your ramming idea, all I would have to do is ram the Orca, which makes me suspect, but will also make the Orca suspect when it rams into the Skiffs in front of it. Now I can use my alt in whatever ship I desire to slowly pick apart that Orca at my leisure without Concord intervention. Either way, my goal of getting that multi-boxing mining bot the hell out of the ice anom would be accomplished.
TLDR:
I have no interest in reading the posts of someone that admitted to wasting my time with facetious posts by their own admission.
Because they don’t realize the consequence of their suggestion. They only see their current problem and don’t think about the wider implications or how such a change to the game mechanics will also change the way the bumpers play.
WHY would they think ramming would change that?
WHY would a carebear prefer taking damage from ramming, to being simply bounced?
You arent answering the questions.
They don’t think they will take damage. They think the bumper has the small ship and so it will explode. They don’t think someone will turn this around because CCP will program some magic safeguard into the system that can derect if it is a lovely carebear or an evil bumper.
Go read ANY thread about bumping if you need a real example.
I checked ZKill and just see that 5 jump-freighters have been ganged today. 5/5 are Rhea. Always with the same “lame” strategy. A ton of EM-torpedos against an hull that is shield based and have
a, 0 EM resist
b, 0 opportunity to increase EM resist
So, it seems to be a logic error to grant the freighters with the lowest hp a “big shield” that has 0 effectiveness against a specific type of damage.
1 Like
How is exploiting a flaw in the enemies shield lame? I think that is a pretty good idea.
1 Like