Yes, ship mass should matter wrt bumping.
No, there shouldn't be collision damage.

Wow, and now the "shut up". You must really be frustrated at this point. But unlike some people I try not to talk too much about what I don't know (hint, hint).

And again...no. There is already a cause-effect relationship from bumping. That is why the ship moves when bumped. That is the physics part which would not have to change. You would just add a damage component. This game has a damage component and it could be adapted to bumping. That does not require an entire recoding of the game as we already have collision effects (projectile weapons hitting other ships).

Anyway let's go back to blowing up transports. Mainly untanked transports in hi sec. And let's apply the EvE logic irl. I fully understand tanked transports in Somalia, but in middle America USA? Sorry, I can't get the logic other than people need a kill mail and will do anything for it. Which btw is also EvE logic. The police can't catch you but they can send you a postcard.

Ramming a frigate through a cruiser is much like suicide ganking in EVE. Funny, effective and man did they rage.

The victims could change this by not making themselves profitable to gank, but that's asking too much, better just nerf ganking again.

You appear to have missed Mallak Azarias point.

If people weren't dumb enough to make themselves profitable to gank they wouldn't be a worthwhile target for suicide gankers to choose, it's not a hard concept to grasp for those of us that are capable of rational thought.


I believe he's referring to your blanket statement that suicide ganking is the ONLY high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game. His anecdote proves your statement to be false, which is probably why you'r trying to spin it in a fashion that doesn't make you look like a fool.

Oi. Nutmonkey. Yes. Baltec1 is correct. 1.35 bil ship got hellamad at me for taking his metal scraps. My incursus t

Says the NPC who equates home invasion and murder to fictional events in a video game.

While I grant the new player tutorials are abysmal at expectation levelling with new players the cold dark realities of EvE life, we can never allow ignorance of (EvE) laws to become a defense.

Also, with the wealth of knowledge that is repeatedly shared on how to avoid ganking, there is ultimately no excuse for the constant whining from butthurt gank victims.

Let us never forget, ganking has already been nerfed mechanics wise by CCP, in a misguided attempt to turn our beloved game into a bubble-wrapped theme park.

ENOUGH!

Its time for WoW-reject gank victims to STFU, HTFU and play EvE as GOD intended....not try to change EvE into WoW with this incessant whining.

F

You don't get it, do you? Newer players in haulers aren't where the profit is at. Older players not bothering to freaking observe the lay of the land is where the profit lies. Don't fall back on the 'go to low sec' adage as that one is stale and holds no water. It's not the only pvp means of generating profit in high sec. New players don't fly freighters. If they bought a freighter pilot in the character bazaar that's fine, but in doing so they take on the responsibilities incumbent to the age of the character they purchased. Nobody is going to cut them a break due to them having bought their character. You undock and you are a target, that is EVE.

And again....bumping to pin down a gank victim between successive waves of gankers. And as discussed, 3 machariels bumping a freighter can make it impossible for the freighters to warp off. And everything I have been saying is right.

Anyone else get the feeling that all the people arguing against easily observable reality here is just one super butt hurt guy with a bunch of alts?

EVE's future has been fine for ten years, despite the likes of you crying about how it will die! if CCP doesn't ban PvP in highsec. And yet, here we are, still here, still playing the game.

.

That simply isn't true, or more new players would last past their first month. A fundamental change in attitude is required to ensure EVE's future.

No, this thread is at 150+ pages because some people think they're special snowflakes and don't have to defend themselves.
.

No, it's the typical self-selection-blaming mentality: GÇ£if you're going to wander aimlessly across the savannah in a meat suit, don't be surprised if the lions maul you (oh, and next time, try a jeep and a set of khakis instead)GÇ¥.

No. They all address the former (which is why the consistent suggestion is to be aware) and they all correct the latter (since it is based almost entirely on ignorance).

So what's so ludicrous about the argument in support of ganking?

No. I just expect them to know some basic mechanics and to take an active role in their own safety, so they can learn from and incorporate all the suggestions and help given to them.



No. Suicide ganking is balanced on being fairly difficult to coordinate and expensive to pull off

You have it arse backwards, my friend. It's not up to CCP to do for you what you can do for yourself with equal access to the same tools that everybody else has.

Lets go over todays Iteron V bad choices.

Firstly, he chose an iteron V to haul near 400 million in cargo. This was mistake number one, he picked the wrong ship for the job or if thats all he could fly, he chose to not make several trips.

Second mistake is the lack of a tank. Just look at that, not a single tanking mod to be seen and worse yet, the mods he did fit all reduce the tank. This is the classical anti-tank fit.

Third mistake, he was AFK. A sin all to common among haulers and miners alike.

Fourth mistake, he was on autopilot. Now by itself its not a bad tool, however when you are in an anti-tanked t1 hauler with 400 mil in the bay it is just asking for trouble.


This haulers choices are what caused his death, the ganker just happened to be in the right place at the right time and got lucky.

Why do you feel entitaled to be exempt from pvp in a pvp game?

Or you could intelligently examine the risk/reward and ask CCP to make appropriate changes.....imagine that....

And the abuse isGǪ?

But it makes him so seriously mad to write it ........................................

I too play numerous games without knowing how to play, then complain vigorously when I lose and blame the other player.

That's why the game survived for 11 years.

Because suicide is literally killing.

I can absolutely confirm that it's Fabulous Rod now. He spun that same Darkfall story in the Rattlesnake thread.

Still expecting the game to cater to his maladjusted expectations, instead of adjusting himself to the reality of the game.

. Eve is a dark gritty universe and Eve has risks.

Ignorance is not a defence.

.

Really? Please do enlighten me.
.

Being self employed and working from home gives me the opportunity to shiptoast while earning money, jelly much?

Suicide ganking keeps things interesting in highsec, and forces players to learn to make good decisions.

Which is irrelevant if you are part of CODE and have -10 sec status. But if we made them spend 2 days ratting or running missions to bring their sec status up that might make them pickier about who they blow up.

. The problem is that the victims blah blah blah

Good because it is... It's also preventable...

Like many have said over, over, and over.

Tank your ship, don't go AFK, use a scout... There's many ways to avoid a ship loss.

To what? You haven't defined any kind of problem with the game.

So define it. Explicitly. Using actual facts to prove that it is a problem.

Well that's enough for tonight....just more speculation, and more dead freighters. 6 yesterday, today was quiet. Maybe they were all "bad" at avoiding bumping, but I seriously doubt that you can ALWAYS escape it, in fact done properly, I strongly suspect that you can virtually NEVER escape it.

I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. Feel free to read what I actually wrote instead of addressing what you would like me to write.

The rest of your comments are....odd....and I don't have a response at this time.

GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance.

This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives?