So you are unable to give the requested information for whatever reason.
1 Like
Have you read The Code, Xebov?
1 Like
No i didnt. But given the answers i got i assume that it is neither transparent nor follows a clear line, otherwise my question would be answerable in 2 or 3 lines.
1 Like
Oh dear, no wonder you are so confused. You should start by reading the Code then. There is no tl;dr here, you have to read the whole thing.
2 Likes
There is a difference about confusion and unansered questions. But ill read it and see how much content and cheeseholes it actually has.
What do you mean by supportable here, exactly?
Since he livestreams his ganks, not sure how doing it on another pc would matter.
Yes, human training and capabilities, i.e. effort. Youre agreeing that it takes skill and training to do this, which means it isnt easy.
I have an orca, fit for tank. I used a 500 mn microwarpdrive, and it still took 27 seconds to warp. Im guessing by one pulse youre talking about activating and deactivating your mwd after a single cycle? Im curious, Are you doing this with max tank or max speed?
In other words, they wanted to move more in less time. Thats called greed. The proof is in the ganks. How many freighters are filled with more than 300 m3 and yet still fitted with inertia stabs or cargo expanders? Theres a kill just yesterday of an obelisk, empty, with inertia stabs.
I dont understand what you mean by this. Are freighters incapable of being remote repped?
No one said you had to multibox. You can get a friend to help scout and web you. You can hire someone too.
And when you consider that, then what youre saying is along the lines of “not everyone wants to Interact with other players in an mmo. But thats just a guess…” i.e. your argument becomes ridiculous.
But then again, i understand why you wouldve missed the fact that you can have a friend to help scout or web for you, and assumed that only an alt could do that.
The answer is yes and yes, although its never happened. Code ganks empty freighters. Theres no profit in that, only enforcement. Code agents are the most selfless, least greedy people in eve.
If you tank by hardeners your HP becomes easier to support because you take less damage and remote repping you becomes more effective. Freighters on the other hand are hull tanks and tank by increasing the HP numbers. Besides the issue in remote hull repping you end up with less supportable hp because your tank does not make repping more effective.
Would negate any availability of background software.
Friend of mine has an Orca fitted mostly for tank and can use it. Maybe he has a little bit less tank than you and thus it works?
Or they just wanted to save some time? Greed requires a plain gain, saving time is not. Otherwise all the ppl in the world running to their bus would be greedy as well… You get my point.
As we already noted Freighters are Hull Tanks, there is no Logistic ship in any way to support this. On top of that the Hull/Shield tank of a Freighter cannot be improved so remote support for shield/armor is limited and remains “As Is” no matter how you fit.
Im not missing that fact. But i know that the web way is just a sideeffect and this leaves little left except having a scout which will not always help you. Logistics are limited to some degree and vary alot depending on the Freighter. Im still in the opinion that propepr use of the fitting system would enable more options to support freighters.
Doesnt fit with things i heard. But ill take that into account.
1 Like
I think you forgot that freighters had no hull resists whatsoever not too long ago 
It’s quite hilarious to see people like you ask for more protection when you can’t fly intelligently around highsec
3 Likes
If you fly smart, your odds of getting ganked in a freighter in high sec are slim. Just look at the gank page of Zkillboard. How many freighters per day do you see on there getting ganked in high sec? 10 to 20 maybe, out of the thousand or so that jump in and out of trade hubs and routes on a daily basis…
2 Likes
Im not asking for more. I ask for more options. You might have missed it, but i wrote several times already that more options would require base statts to be changed to reflect it.
But as usual if changes are suggested ppl crawl out of their holes in fear that they might have to adapt instead of starting a propper discussion and thats what i find hilarious.
1 Like
But you’re not asking for more? Lmao
You don’t want to adapt tho
How ironic that people killing freighters should adapt but not freighter pilots
Smh 
1 Like
If i reduce base statts and add rig and fitting slots the possible max result would stay roughtly the same, but with more finegrained options how to get there. Im failing to see a negative impact here.
Both have to and thats the point you are missing. Giving more options to fit them can result in more options to handle them for pilots. Its still up to them if they want to use them. Gankers would have to adapt too because possible options what could happen would get higher.
Players love EVEs complexity and like to have more. Freighters only use a fraction of that complexity because they are booted out of most of that. No fitting, no propper interaction with other ships, nothing. Everything is at a baseline. I have the strong feeling that when it comes to freighter ganking ppl on both sides would like it way more simplified than it already is instead of having a bit more of eves complexity added.
1 Like
A goodly percentage of people would use rig slots for cargo if they had access to lows; which they’d probably also use for cargo. Take a look at the freighter changes thread on the old forums, and the whines that resulted from them when people figured out what we’d been telling them all along, to get the same cargo as the old stats you had to fit for cargo at the expense of hull ehp, which is where all of the tank is on a freighter; but if you wanted to tank it, you now had that option at the expense of potential cargo capacity.
When they get ganked people will come on the forums and entertain us with their tales of woe and tragedy, just as they do now.
More choice means even more opportunity for people to make themselves victims through making poor choices.
2 Likes
Which would be there choice and they would have to live with the consequences.
So no negative impact on that end.
Which is not an argument against it. They are free to learn and players who want to make better or different choices could do it. Following your argument you would have to simplify and forbid other things in game because it leads to poor choices. And we all know what happens when someone wants to simplify something.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for people making poor decisions, there’s often a profit in it for someone.
For example I sell more retrievers than I do procurers, despite one being a superior choice in terms of you’ll probably never have to replace it; people making “poor” decisions is one my income sources in Eve.
Agreed, I’m merely pointing out the obvious, and the resulting whine threads calling for more of the same kind of changes in the pursuit of total security rather than high security.
The problem is people that don’t learn from their mistakes, instead they blame the game and the circle of nerf -insert FOTM whine- starts anew.
3 Likes
I love having more options myself, but the way I’d see this going is people going full antitank on their freighters, die while flying it and them crying on the forums their freighter was too squishy or something 
Then we’d pretty much be at the same point
4 Likes
@ISD_Buldath can you clean up the thread a little?
Also, I think it’s time for your reign to be over