# Matthew Dust for CSM 14 (Faction Warfare/Lowsec) **URL:** \ **Category:** CSM Campaigns\ **Tags:** faction-war, low-sec, community\ **Created:** [May 10, 2019, 8:13am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/matthew-dust-for-csm-14-faction-warfare-lowsec/158042 "2019-05-10T08:13:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 40
**Author:** ![Knowledgeminer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/knowledgeminer/32/422883_2.png) [@Knowledgeminer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Knowledgeminer)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2019, 10:51am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/matthew-dust-for-csm-14-faction-warfare-lowsec/158042/40 "2019-06-16T10:51:31Z")
> [@Matthew\_Dust](#): > > CCP banned neutral logi assistance. I’m not saying it was a 100 percent effective way for saving freighters, but people were doing it out of spite to CODE to save them. They received a suspect flag, now they are also concordokened…They killed a play style and made it obsolete in favor of ganking. Maybe you mean something else here, but as stated this is plain wrong. Remote repping a freighter being _suicide_ ganked didn’t cause a suspect timer before and it **doesn’t** cause a criminal timer now… _unless_ the freighter is in a limited engagement (which being suicide ganked **doesn’t** create)… If you’re considering the case of freighters being tricked into a duel and then killed (not suicide ganked) that way then, well, trying to “save” that freighter with remote reps was as pointless when it would give a suspect timer before as it is now that it gives a criminal timer… And if you’re considering the case of the freighter being in a limited engagement because of a webbing alt, then the webber should simply stop webbing the freighter if it starts being bumped, to let the limited engagement timer expire, so it can be repped if suicide ganked. Webbing a freighter that’s being bumped already is pointless anyway. > [@Matthew\_Dust](#): > > As friends who did both freighter saving and station games I can say I’m 100% against changes that make playstyles obsolete. I’m very reluctant to that type of changes too, but I think being 100% against them just because of that is a bit extreme and not the right attitude to have. You have to _fully_ understand the consequences as a whole **and** the _new_ playstyles that may emerge as a result, before deciding you 100% oppose them. For the reasons explained above, thinking this killed remote assistance of freighters being suicide ganked is an example of not fully understanding the consequences of the change in that case and why that’s a non-issue. As to the suspect baiting, that would be (for me at least) an example of not being sure whether this is good or bad in the long run because, even though I see how it killed a particular playstyle (which I agree when taken in isolation is bad), it isn’t clear to me what would be the long term effect of pilots no longer having to be afraid of engaging a suspect because of what else might come with it… The fact that the change killed a particular playstyle is a strong indication that it might be wrong, but one shouldn’t be 100% against it for that reason _alone_… EDIT: Just wanted to comment on those things, but you have my vote, FWIW, as the second option. 🙂 --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/matthew-dust-for-csm-14-faction-warfare-lowsec/158042)._