EVE Search - We the undersigned protest suicide ganking and request changes.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

We the undersigned protest suicide ganking and request changes.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Raivi Explosion Matrix	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:13:00 - [121] Edited by: Raivi on 28/03/2007 17:11:32 Originally by: Humpalot I have considered these strategies and was kinda hoping the smartbombing battleship would stay in the box till some suicide gankers got surprised by it . That said in defense of my Freighter I will almost certainly lose the smartbombing battleship to CONCORD. All the pirates have to do is leave one (or more) bumping ships out of the gang and the defender is toast. Add to that whatever sec hits come with that (especially if the smartbombing Apoc pods a few people which is likely in this case). Would I lose the Apoc in defense of the freighter? In a heartbeat...be worth it just to watch 100 drones and 20 other battleships go poof. Nevertheless as a hauler that makes it a rather expensive haul and how many times can I defend myself before sec hits force me out of the guarding business? Yeah although it would be fairly costly in insurace and sec status, failed suicide ganks would be really funny. I'm sure that a little exposure here won't really reduce the effectiveness of smartbombs, as even with the danger of losing your drones and therefore your DPS, drone ships are still by far the best way to suicide gank. As for keeping ideas inside the box, you should see some of my strategies for defending my lvl 5 missions in lowsec in a few months. Explosion Matrix: Nostrum Nomen est Ridiculum
Gaia Thorn Villains	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:14:00 - [122] im sorry but you people are really not getting this THERE ARE NO SAFE SPACE JUST SAFER. No you shouldnt be SAFE in high sec if i want to suicide you then that's my choice i pay for it with both sec hit and ship cost. No should not be able to fit any modules to a freighter if that would be the case i want CCP to cut it's HP by 2/3 due to the fact it's a transport vessel not a combat vessel. And you do have your right to play the game but YOU just dont want to follow the rules stated by CCP.
Venix An Eye For An Eye Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:18:00 - [123] Edited by: Venix on 28/03/2007 17:17:53 Ok, i only read the first post, and this may have been said in the others. EvE is very much so like real life in the way things happen. Name a place on earth that is totally safe where nothing ever goes wrong, no body dies, and nothing ever gets stolen......you cant. It does not matter if space is 0.0 or 1.0, you should be able to get ganked. 1.0-0.5 has CONCORD which do their job to kill whom ever kills you, but as we have seen before, not even a freighter can be 100% safe in highsec vs a gang large enough. Much like how in RL a Police officer isnt 100% safe, its all about someone willing to take the risk and hope they dont get caught or if they do that its not a bad punishment. I dont agree with stealig and robbing ect ect in RL, but here in EvE, its only a game, and im all for it. Ni4Ni
Turas Kain Minmatar Dark Moon Industries	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:24:00 - [124] Suiciding a freighter is without risk? Whatever you've been drinking I want some! For one thing if you don't manage to pop the freighter you've just lost approx 20 BS not to mentioned wasted all the time spent planning and organising. Lets say 30 mil loss per BS and your 600mil down. Mistakes happen, its already happened before. Taking around 25 pilots (including hauler alts and a scout or 2) to down your ship in hi sec hardly qualifies as an easy task. You're going to have to make it very worthwhile in your little freighter. The aggressors are depending on a good chunk of the freighters loot surviving the explosion. Now if your going to fill it with 15bil+ worth of lots of different items then your just asking for trouble. If you think you should be able to move around such massive amounts of ISK completely risk free in empire then your thoughts differ from mine, and presumably from the Dev's given the current situation. There is no rule which insists your freighter has to be full every time, if you have so much valuable cargo then you can spare the time to transport it in seperate loads or run the risk of being ganked. Exact same rules apply to all hauling. As far as I can remember the market existed before freighters and seemed to work fine for traders & industrial corps. You've simply becomes too used to how much easier it was with freighters recently. The fact freighters did not drop loot, was not working as intended. As demonstrated by the fact it was tried to be fixed before but got delayed. Maybe I should have petitioned every freighter I popped because I got no loot so the pilot was presumably metagaming? In terms of defense a shuttle has no defensive capability so perhaps they should not drop loot? In realistic terms if a hauler is ganked by 5 battleships it has no defensive capability. Maybe it should be extended so if your ganked at all you do not drop loot.
Aindrias Amarr Fomus-Amarr Industrial Novus Ordos Seclorum	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:28:00 - [125] Edited by: Aindrias on 28/03/2007 17:28:46 Edited by: Aindrias on 28/03/2007 17:26:10 Originally by: Venix Ok, i only read the first post, and this may have been said in the others. EvE is very much so like real life in the way things happen. Name a place on earth that is totally safe where nothing ever goes wrong, no body dies, and nothing ever gets stolen......you cant. It does not matter if space is 0.0 or 1.0, you should be able to get ganked. 1.0-0.5 has CONCORD which do their job to kill whom ever kills you, but as we have seen before, not even a freighter can be 100% safe in highsec vs a gang large enough. Much like how in RL a Piloce officer isnt 100% safe, its all about someone willing to take the risk and hope they dont get caught or if they do that its not a bad punishment. I dont agree with stealig and robbing ect ect in RL, but here in EvE its only a game and im all for it. Yeah, A Criminal could blow up the car of a person in front a police officer and then summarily get shot by said police officer. That's fine, I don't think anyone here has said otherwise. But can random guy walk up to the crime seen and steal the stereo and other stuff from the car of the victim with the Police officer saying.... "Don't do that... I said don't do that... damn, you did that, now I have to write a report and lower your standing.. but if you go kill some other bad guys we'll forget all about it" the officer then turns to the now re-cloned Criminal.. "By the way, submit a report to the police and insurance so you can get your gun back, without the bullets of course" Um.. this is exactly what's happening.. Sure you can try and do nearly anything, the freighter will die... you are not safe.. fine... but why should you uber profit from it and not incur any risk in the process? THat is not "like the real world" in anyway.. I wish it was though. Aind
Raivi Explosion Matrix	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:39:00 - [126] When you consider that Concord as a police force never does anything about theft by capsuleers, the fact that they don't care if you loot the wreck isn't all that surprising. Capsuleers are a force unto themselves, and the government has decided to pick it's battles and for the most part leaves policing of crimes like theft up the pod pilots themselves. Explosion Matrix: Nostrum Nomen est Ridiculum
Sile Suirghiche Gaidhlig Technology	Posted - 2007.03.28 17:55:00 - [127] Originally by: Avon your solo gameplay has to be compromised to counter organised groups is, frankly, whinging. Organized? Sort of. Organized but taking advantage of loopholes in the game structure. Noob corp alt suicide ganks are (sorta cowardly and) abusive of game mechanics. However, even if suicide gank squads were people using their corp'ed mains I would still question CONCORD policy and implementation, insurance payouts to police victims and the inability to actually protect a freighter. I don't see why every difference of opinion on game balance has to devolve into accusations of whinging and everyone whipping out their ruler for a quick manliness-measuring.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.28 18:30:00 - [128] Originally by: Sile Suirghiche Originally by: Avon your solo gameplay has to be compromised to counter organised groups is, frankly, whinging. Organized? Sort of. Organized but taking advantage of loopholes in the game structure. Noob corp alt suicide ganks are (sorta cowardly and) abusive of game mechanics. However, even if suicide gank squads were people using their corp'ed mains I would still question CONCORD policy and implementation, insurance payouts to police victims and the inability to actually protect a freighter. I don't see why every difference of opinion on game balance has to devolve into accusations of whinging and everyone whipping out their ruler for a quick manliness-measuring. This is an attempt for some, currently unidentified, ironic posting prize, non? Noob gankers? Ohnoes. Because we all know that freighters are flown by pilots in war-dec'able player corps, right? Concord don't deal with theft. Not their job. Never has been. Never should be. Want your stuff? Look after it. Insurance? Smokescreen. We are talking about freighters carrying billions, not some borderline profitable industrial. If the insurance being paid to "gankers" is such an unfair safety net, why not just go gank the gankers first? You'll lose your ship, but hey, the insurance will pay you too. Those gamemechanics swing both ways, y'know? All this boils down to is that some people think that they deserve protection not offered to other players. They don't want things to be fair, as they claim, they want them to be biased in their favour. Why? Because they are the living definition of the word "carebear". The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Aindrias Amarr Fomus-Amarr Industrial Novus Ordos Seclorum	Posted - 2007.03.28 18:39:00 - [129] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Sile Suirghiche Originally by: Avon your solo gameplay has to be compromised to counter organised groups is, frankly, whinging. Organized? Sort of. Organized but taking advantage of loopholes in the game structure. Noob corp alt suicide ganks are (sorta cowardly and) abusive of game mechanics. However, even if suicide gank squads were people using their corp'ed mains I would still question CONCORD policy and implementation, insurance payouts to police victims and the inability to actually protect a freighter. I don't see why every difference of opinion on game balance has to devolve into accusations of whinging and everyone whipping out their ruler for a quick manliness-measuring. This is an attempt for some, currently unidentified, ironic posting prize, non? Noob gankers? Ohnoes. Because we all know that freighters are flown by pilots in war-dec'able player corps, right? Concord don't deal with theft. Not their job. Never has been. Never should be. Want your stuff? Look after it. Insurance? Smokescreen. We are talking about freighters carrying billions, not some borderline profitable industrial. If the insurance being paid to "gankers" is such an unfair safety net, why not just go gank the gankers first? You'll lose your ship, but hey, the insurance will pay you too. Those gamemechanics swing both ways, y'know? All this boils down to is that some people think that they deserve protection not offered to other players. They don't want things to be fair, as they claim, they want them to be biased in their favour. Why? Because they are the living definition of the word "carebear". Oh.. I guess this CCP Description of CONCORD is wrong then... CONCORD Assembly CONCORD is an independent organization founded a century ago to facilitate negotiations between the races to improve relations, as well as to foster inter-stellar trade through policing and regulations. Starting as a fledgling meeting ground for diplomats CONCORD has in the decades since it was founded slowly increased its power and influence. It has become an entity independent of the races, as it is able to largely fund its own operation through customs, confiscation of contraband goods, and other means. Corporations in CONCORD Assembly >> Aind
Sile Suirghiche Gaidhlig Technology	Posted - 2007.03.28 18:54:00 - [130] Originally by: Avon Because we all know that freighters are flown by pilots in war-dec'able player corps, right? Mine is. If someone else's is not, then that's another problem, not a justification for this one. I do, in fact, think that noob corp alts are a problem in general, but one that I don't have any easy solutions for. One thing at a time. Originally by: Avon Concord don't deal with theft. Not their job. Never has been. Never should be. Want your stuff? Look after it. I'm not asking Concord to prevent theft. I'm asking that if Concord won't let me shoot you, they won't let you shoot me. Simple really. Getting around that by outside-the-game actions such as noob alts seems like pure and simple exploiting to me, cheating. CCP has made set things up so that you must volunteer to be held accountable for your game actions. Most of us do, most of the time. It's the others that are presenting a problem here. Originally by: Avon If the insurance being paid to "gankers" is such an unfair safety net, why not just go gank the gankers first? You'll lose your ship, but hey, the insurance will pay you too. Those gamemechanics swing both ways, y'know? Gank them first? How exactly? Suicide gank everyone I see in a noob corp because they might be about to gank me or someone else? Seems like a low signal to noise ratio solution. The game mechanics do not swing both ways. They do in low sec and 0.0. I am not opposed to war, pirates, PvP of whatever flavour. What I am opposed to is "laws" and "police" that take away my ability to protect myself without taking over that responsibility. Don't take away my guns and tie my hands behind my back unless you darn well guarantee to protect me. Originally by: Avon All this boils down to is that some people think that they deserve protection not offered to other players. They don't want things to be fair, as they claim, they want them to be biased in their favour. I'm not asking for special treatment, and neither is anyone else that I can see. We're asking that the rules be re-examined to better reflect new developments. I'm not threatening to quit or demanding everyone who disagrees with me be instapermabanned, I'm just saying...
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.28 18:54:00 - [131] Quote: Some players are willing to lose ships and their good standing with Concord for the hope of quick profit from a juicy loot drop. The ôkamikazeö attackers usually work in pairs or groups. They scan the cargo holds of bypassing pilots flying easily destructable ships until they see something worthy of a ship loss. They then blow up the ship and and while Concord do what they do best, a second character picks up the loot from the shipÆs wreck. This is not seen as an exploit of the intended game mechanics and there is no compensation or reimbursement to be had for losses caused by attacks in secure space. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Adrian Kerensky Caldari STK Scientific Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:00:00 - [132] "safer space" Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes - Devil 258 bytes over!
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:04:00 - [133] Edited by: Avon on 28/03/2007 19:00:23 Originally by: Sile Suirghiche Originally by: Avon Because we all know that freighters are flown by pilots in war-dec'able player corps, right? Mine is. If someone else's is not, then that's another problem, not a justification for this one. I do, in fact, think that noob corp alts are a problem in general, but one that I don't have any easy solutions for. One thing at a time. Originally by: Avon Concord don't deal with theft. Not their job. Never has been. Never should be. Want your stuff? Look after it. I'm not asking Concord to prevent theft. I'm asking that if Concord won't let me shoot you, they won't let you shoot me. Simple really. Getting around that by outside-the-game actions such as noob alts seems like pure and simple exploiting to me, cheating. CCP has made set things up so that you must volunteer to be held accountable for your game actions. Most of us do, most of the time. It's the others that are presenting a problem here. Originally by: Avon If the insurance being paid to "gankers" is such an unfair safety net, why not just go gank the gankers first? You'll lose your ship, but hey, the insurance will pay you too. Those gamemechanics swing both ways, y'know? Gank them first? How exactly? Suicide gank everyone I see in a noob corp because they might be about to gank me or someone else? Seems like a low signal to noise ratio solution. The game mechanics do not swing both ways. They do in low sec and 0.0. I am not opposed to war, pirates, PvP of whatever flavour. What I am opposed to is "laws" and "police" that take away my ability to protect myself without taking over that responsibility. Don't take away my guns and tie my hands behind my back unless you darn well guarantee to protect me. Originally by: Avon All this boils down to is that some people think that they deserve protection not offered to other players. They don't want things to be fair, as they claim, they want them to be biased in their favour. I'm not asking for special treatment, and neither is anyone else that I can see. We're asking that the rules be re-examined to better reflect new developments. I'm not threatening to quit or demanding everyone who disagrees with me be instapermabanned, I'm just saying... Re-read your post. You have actually agreed that the game mechanics DO apply equally, whilst trying to argue that they do not. If you CHOOSE to ATTACK someone who is not at WAR with you, or CRIMINALLY FLAGGED, Concord wtfpwn you. That applies to you, and it applies to the "gankers". The important bit is the CHOICE. You choose not to, and think it is bad. They choose to, and they think they ARE bad. What you are asking for is that CCP change the game to reinforce what you see as valid gameplay, and prevent others from playing the role that you think is "unfair". Well, I've got news for you. Being a "bad guy" is just as valid as being a "good guy". Can you protect yourself? Yes. Do you choose to do so? No. Oh, btw, I figured out a way to protect a freighter from the current style of suicide attack using frigates. Not lots of them, one might do the job, four probably would, six definately would. Concord do the hard part, the rest is easy. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:17:00 - [134] Something needs to be fixed because the system is broken. there is no defense to suicide gankers in high sec, and that is why it is broken. I mean these guys are easy to spot but you can do nothing about them. The easiest fix imho, is loot rights, only the players who attacked the ship can loot it and only after 15 minutes if concord kills them. If you wanted to be hardcore concord could scoop the loot and hold it if you are killed in high sec.
Humpalot	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:31:00 - [135] Originally by: Avon Can you protect yourself? Yes. Do you choose to do so? No. Can we protect ourselves? No, not really. Remote repping would be a joke and wholly ineffective. Scouting can be easily bypassed by the gankers. Can I be proactive and attack the waiting gankers first? Not really as CONCORD would nail me. Perhaps a smartbombing battleship would work but in order to defend the freighter that battleship will likely be lost and the pilot take a serious sec hit (as it will probably kill a few non-flagged people and pod them to boot). Want frieghters to drop loot fine. If someone wants to fly with billions alone and AFK they have what's coming to them. I think people are just asking for mechanisms that allow for proper guarding and not to reward those who "break the law" by handing them tens of millions for their actions. This in no way says one set of rules applies for one groups and another set for a different group. EVE has always been about risk v. reward and suicide ganking is utterly imbalanced in this. Provide tools for people to do exactly what you are suggesting to allow for a respectable chance at escorting their charges.
Sile Suirghiche Gaidhlig Technology	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:35:00 - [136] Originally by: Avon Well, I've got news for you. Being a "bad guy" is just as valid as being a "good guy". Then why are you complaining about us acting like good guys? Originally by: Avon Can you protect yourself? Yes. Do you choose to do so? No. Actually, I'm concerned about game balance, not my own ship/wallet. If I autopilot my freighter through Jita loaded with BPOs for T3 wtfpwnmobiles the way things are and I get ganked, then on my own head be it. This is not about me. It's about Eve. Same as you.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.28 19:51:00 - [137] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 Something needs to be fixed because the system is broken. there is no defense to suicide gankers in high sec, and that is why it is broken. I mean these guys are easy to spot but you can do nothing about them. The easiest fix imho, is loot rights, only the players who attacked the ship can loot it and only after 15 minutes if concord kills them. If you wanted to be hardcore concord could scoop the loot and hold it if you are killed in high sec. I have already pointed out that you can use frigates to defend against this, so the no defence arguement is out of the window. If you can't figure it out (and it is painfully simple), then you can buy the info off me. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
pricecheck8	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:02:00 - [138] i would call this griefing. lets face it the freighter a- does not have slots to tank/defend and b- it moves/warps like a snail. if they are attacked lets face it by the time they try and warp somewhere as long as it takes not they will be dead before they even warp out and the pirate/attacker getting their insurance payout means -0- risk for them, and having to fly escorts for every freighter is just as bad if youre in empire/not in war with any1
Nomme Mu..	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:13:00 - [139] Rapier+Sensor boosters+Domination Web Problem solved.
Krugerrand 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:13:00 - [140] The large amount of effort it takes to organize a freighter hi-sec gank for the potential little reward means I do not see this becoming a big issue. You need a large gang equipped properly. You need intel on a target. That target must have a cargo in excess of 3b, expect a large amount to pop. You need the means to pickup potentially a lot of m3 before others scavenge the best stuff.
Humpalot	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:16:00 - [141] Originally by: Avon I have already pointed out that you can use frigates to defend against this, so the no defence arguement is out of the window. If you can't figure it out (and it is painfully simple), then you can buy the info off me. I suspect you know your stuff and do indeed have some frig setup that you feel would suffice for freighter guarding. But unless you share this deep dark secret with the rest of us to discuss its viability as far as I am concerned it doesn't exist. Doubtless such knowledg would become common enough soon enough if it does exist. So, without trying to be snarky: Proof or STFU
Humpalot	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:19:00 - [142] Originally by: Nomme Rapier+Sensor boosters+Domination Web Problem solved. Don't think that would do it. Certainly speeds things up but chances are good the gankers bumpers would get into action before you could warp away and that's the end of that.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:42:00 - [143] Originally by: Humpalot Originally by: Avon I have already pointed out that you can use frigates to defend against this, so the no defence arguement is out of the window. If you can't figure it out (and it is painfully simple), then you can buy the info off me. I suspect you know your stuff and do indeed have some frig setup that you feel would suffice for freighter guarding. But unless you share this deep dark secret with the rest of us to discuss its viability as far as I am concerned it doesn't exist. Doubtless such knowledg would become common enough soon enough if it does exist. So, without trying to be snarky: Proof or STFU Make it worth my while and the info is yours. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Nomme Mu..	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:45:00 - [144] Originally by: Humpalot Originally by: Nomme Rapier+Sensor boosters+Domination Web Problem solved. Don't think that would do it. Certainly speeds things up but chances are good the gankers bumpers would get into action before you could warp away and that's the end of that. Try it and see ;p
Sadayiel Caldari Black Lance NBSI Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.28 20:50:00 - [145] Missed most of the post but let Concord become effective finally. 1) Concordokken = you miss all ship insurance, sorry but it's the life. 2) High,punishment rates = seriously with the massive population and crime, concord can't bother in arrest evildoers, in fact they Shoot to kill!! (let them pod ppl) 3) Drugs and stealing = well allow concord to scan ships for stealing goods, if they find you decide to drop or to run, in same way as they do if you carry drugs. so most of ppl will consider if use that biggie inty, or dos everal atempts just my 3 cents Every man know he's going to die, but no one believes that's going to happen
Gjutet	Posted - 2007.03.28 21:41:00 - [146] There is nothing that is safe at all. Like i could take a gun go outside a police station. And use that gun a blow someones brain out. just because its "Safe zone" doesnt mean bad things can happen. Bad example but same thing.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2007.03.28 22:07:00 - [147] As usual, I feel torn about this. Suicide alting is cheap and lame, but its the only viable way to attack Empire n00b/alt farmers or macros. CCP made this Transport gank change out of the blue, and to my knowledge, with no explanation. Not that they need any, its obvious that their desire to increase PvP/Gank at any cost, in a number or ways, reigns supreme. The argument isnt about safety, btw, people could have killed Transports at any time in the past. Its about a new gankable,lucrative target.
Humpalot	Posted - 2007.03.28 22:20:00 - [148] Originally by: Gjutet There is nothing that is safe at all. Like i could take a gun go outside a police station. And use that gun a blow someones brain out. just because its "Safe zone" doesnt mean bad things can happen. Bad example but same thing. Yeah but then the police do not let your friend come by and snag the wallet and watch of the person you shot nor does your insurance pay you after you crash your car trying to get away.
Shayla Sh'inlux The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion	Posted - 2007.03.28 23:07:00 - [149] I havent actually seen organized gangs taking down freighter after freighter in hisec, so it seems a lot of speculation atm. It being possible (I know it can be done) does seem a little bit odd considering potential gain vs the certain loss. Btw Avon, you kinda blew up your own argument with the CCP quote; let me highlight it for you: Quote: Some players are willing to lose ships and their good standing with Concord for the hope of quick profit from a juicy loot drop. The ôkamikazeö attackers usually work in pairs or groups. They scan the cargo holds of bypassing pilots flying easily destructable ships until they see something worthy of a ship loss. They then blow up the ship and and while Concord do what they do best, a second character picks up the loot from the shipÆs wreck. This is not seen as an exploit of the intended game mechanics and there is no compensation or reimbursement to be had for losses caused by attacks in secure space. Since when are 183k hitpoint freighters classified as "easily destructable"? Discussing moderation is a no-no- Tirg
Xiator Z	Posted - 2007.03.29 00:00:00 - [150] Edited by: Xiator Z on 29/03/2007 00:03:17 /signed (because of freighter changes) Reasons: - Risk vs Reward screwed up The attackers risk aproximatly 600 mil worth of ships when insured. When moving house the freighter pilot risks the freighter, plus the cargo. The isks at stake for the freighter pilot exceed 600 mil by far in usual cases. Also, in case the freighter pilot wins (If friends helped, or the attackers miscalculated the attack) the freighter pilot survives but wins nothing (No, I do not count cheap t1 mods as winning anything). But if the attackers win, they gain everything the frieghter pilot had in cargo. If they scanned before, their possible win is vast. - Do not risk what you can not afford to lose rule. Most would agree on that rule of thumb. If you do, then using freighters to move house is now not a viable option anymore. Solution to suicide ganking in general: - Remove insurance payout on ships when they are used for acts in which Concord attacks them. SIMPLE. To anyone with itchy fingers to flame me now, PLEASE explain to me first why any insurance would or should pay if the ship was used for acts in which concord blows up the ship. IMHO this is bar any valid reasoning.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.