Okay, you are a hater as well. I have no idea what the ■■■■ you are reading in my posts, but I recommend leaving the PC once in a while, and maybe talking to real people more often.
You sound like Salvos. Go away, we already have one. Maybe eventually you can drop that shitty wooden plank in front of your eyes again, so you start reading what’s written without the need to “be right at any and all costs”.
You are welcome.
Discard war decs.
And assume things will change when really this only makes the status quo more expensive. But blame others for not seeing things the exact same way you do?
The fact that this* is what you clinge to …
… one point five million isk …
… tells me that it’s even better than I thought.
Your “arguments” are of no matter or concern for someone who lost a freighter … and some stupid idea about guarantees no one cares about, because we are not talking in absolutes.
Feel free to have the last word, to talk to my hand and next time please try harder.
For real, though… are you Salvos?
I claim dibs on calling you Salvos first, just in case! 
Time for bed. : - )
You are contradicting yourself.
You know what would be more fun than MJD freighters.
If all empires where only connected via low-sec systems. 
Guys, gankers can use alts and alphas in frigates and noob ships to suicide tackle. This is why we don’t have ‘auto-warp’ after aligning for so long. Its cheap and easy to nullify.
Yes, we know that … but I fail to see how this is a point.
It seems that everyone is assuming that people are dedicating themselves enough into this, to actually permanently tackle a freighter using scrams, which will get blown away either by CONCORD or the sentry turrets.
Brick-tanking a tackler will not actually make it any better either, because then the ganker would have to remove CONCORD as well. When there are only the sentry turrets, he would at least have a chance of not needing to remove CONCORD, which saves him time … but nothing else.
So how do you permascram someone? How many others do you need to achieve this? How long will the freighter actually be scrammed in one continuous session?
It only takes six seconds (iirc) for the mjd to warm up and fire, and even at ten seconds you still would need to re-initiate scram every 11 seconds!
Is that wrong?
Yes, because the MJD can be scrammed in less than 6 seconds. It also has a longer cooldown time than 11 seconds. Try 180 seconds. So it’s a one use attempt and then if it fails consider the ship toast.
You also might need a lesson:
i think freighters need a rapier or huggin to escort them, webbing them off the gate instantly. That said, this is not proof of ganking, which I had the KM to post but there was one I seen recently with a rapier, it was goons ganking them, and they got his ass regardless.
http://eve-gatecheck.space/eve/ is helpful as well.
You know what’s interesting… I’ve really never seen anyone demonstrate numbers to show that suicide ganking is actually bad. I admit I don’t like it, but that doesn’t necessarily make it bad. I mean, ultimately it’s uncommon enough that it shouldn’t especially affect the economy. By the same rarity, it probably doesn’t especially affect CCP’s financials either. Maybe anti-gankers don’t care so much about ganking, but maybe this is just their meta game?
It seems common in threads that people think the plural of anecdote is data.
It would take a lot of alts. But gankers HAVE a lot of alts
Damn, I haven’t used it for so long, I forgot how it works.
Thanks! I must have mixed it up with the anchorable unit, which iirc gives no cooldown timer.
Sorry about that, now this makes more sense.
Yes, and with the cooldown it should be managable.
My bad.
I still believe it is not a bad idea, because at least he has an option he can try. It is unreasonable to assume that there will always be a horde of alts ready for this. What if two freighters are being bumped at the same time?
You guys make it look like as if gankers would be always prepared for everything, which is silly. Balancing around the absolute worst case gives no room for activity.
I’m not sure what to think of the idea. It will definitely not save a freighter from anything. It will be more like a “let me move my precious cargo away from this gate so you can kill me more easily” kind of thing. And it will give a bumping Machariel a whole new level of fun, too. A bit like giving a dog a squeaky toy, which can also jump around.
I sure won’t fit it onto my freighter. But here is the issue I think I will have with this. It will require more PG and CPU to fit it onto a freighter, which means one can fit a lot of other mid-slot modules, too. Unless they gave it a special bonus or made it a special item to avoid all the extra options one would get with a mid-slot will the idea not work. And I honestly have my doubts if CCP would give us such a feature all for a questionable purpose.
So I’m not against it, but I also see very little value in it.
I’d rather have a probe launcher on my freighter than to go through low-sec with it.
If you look at Freighters now, they have a bonus to be able to fit bulkheads:
If this suggestion was implemented, it would most likely be done the same way. The fitting would essentially be free.
I don’t like the idea, but this is how it would be implemented if it was, so it avoids a tonne of other problems.
Exactly, and I just cannot imagine CCP adding another special role bonus for an item with a questionable use.
Gankers (and goons who are also ganking related), have shown themselves to be pretty ingenious, and stubborn in their determination.
You still pretend that it would always be the case, every day, every hour, which is nonsense.