EVE General Discussion

lolno

If you wanted "Realistic" self destruction in order to successfully self destruct you'd need a team of dust players armed with fire axes to run around your ship interior for twenty minutes smashing every piece of electronic equipment they can find while others jam classified information into cooking equipment (a mini-game of some kind might work here).

Realism was never a part of EVE. It's closer than most games but it's still a game and therefore can never be realistic.

In real life delicate computer and mechanical components don't tend to survive massive explosions unscathed. Since ships in EVE are almost always over 100m+ long any explosion that destroys the ship should ruin any working components. That's why I like the salvaging feature so much, you get burnt out, damaged or malfunctioning parts and scrap metal, which is what would be left in a destroyed ship.

In EVE you don't even need to repair the modules you loot from wrecks, you can slap it straight on your hull. Not realistic. You should get salvaged parts and a lump of scrap metal equal to or less than the total mass of the ship, not intact ammo, turrets, launchers or hull plates. That's just weird.

Oh, of course, but that applies both to self destruction and destruction at someone elses hands. The OP was pushing for self-destruction being somehow a "more effective" means of destroying your own ship, based on the fact that "it is" in real life. I was merely contesting that point, because as far as I can tell (of course, I'm no expert here), it isn't.


Not wishing to state the obvious, but I'm fairly sure when someone scuttles a warship in real life, it can't really be said that they've "won" anything.

As I said in my first post (perhaps a little too sarcastically, apologies for that!), the point of scuttling is to prevent capture of the ship, and technically in EvE it does the same thing (since you are not ejecting). The difference here is not in the self-destruct mechanic, but in the fact there is rarely any reason to consider "abandoning ship" of your own volition, and the enemy have no means of capturing a ship against the owners will (no boarding mechanics or means of frying a pod while the ship remains intac) either, so there is no reason to have a mechanic to prevent such capture.

Since you eject in pod at destruction the same as in ejection (and even ejecting to avoid skillpoint loss from T3's got changed so there was no longer this point to it), you might as well just ride it down. Perhaps if there was a reason to eject rather than await destruction, say if your pod automatically MJDed 100km from the ship (to get the pod away from close range tackle and maybe out of the clutches of warp bubbles), there might be a point to setting the self-destruct, and bailing out (in fact, at present, its preferable to await destruction, as you can spam warp while waiting to be ejected, rather than ejecting yourself and risk a delay before you warp that might cost you your pod). Alternatively, if setting the self destruct triggered a short-range aoe (and also took out your pod if you haven't bailed out and warped away in time), again, that gives a purpose to the mechanic of abandoning ship.

To my mind, its not the self-destruct which is operating incorrectly - that's fine. It's just the mechanics that a self destruct are intended to prevent (ship capture) don't exist in the game in a manner to make the self-destruct relevant as a counter to it.

Overloading the warp drive to cause a localised subspace implosion could provide an effective and complete method of user-initiated ship disposal whilst satisfying the demands of high-sec safety.

True EvE is a game. If you go to the website and look at the historical video about how EvE came to be. the designers had originally wanted the game to be as realistic as possible but in a futuristic setting. The game is based from a 1980's series game called Elite or so they said and was designed by 5 individuals. Anyways back to the subject.....

The purpose for self destructing a ship is prevent anything on the ship from ever being used. If a player chooses to self destruct their ship, then that is what should occur. Most if not all items on the ship should be rendered either completely useless or require money to fix. IMHO when they re did the self destruct option, the Dev's went a little too far. They rendered it virtually useless and grossly one sided. Completely eliminating one option a player could have to avoid being destroyed. Negotiation. The option should either be redesigned to allow this or it should be completely removed from the game.

The reason it was re written was to keep players from denying the aggressors their kill. Which is fine, Let them have their little rubber stamp so they can gloat. But still allow the player to be able to use that as a tactical means of negotiation. If they feel they need to self destruct, then render anything on that ship either useless or requiring various degrees of repair expenses once the self destruct occurs. Make the function more level vice tilted to one side or the other.

1. Deny the enemy a killmail
2. Take out some of your cargo in the process (Used to be everything but not anymore)
3. Easy way to find an exit to a wormhole (destruct your pod)
4. Fireworks are pretty

Scuttling would see some use if ships were ever actually in danger of being captured.

For example, if you had a fleet docked up in a station that you were about to lose. Scuttling the fleet, rather than letting it fall into the enemy hands, might be applicable.

Historically, that's pretty much the reason why you'd ever scuttle an otherwise working vessel. For example: The scuttling of the French fleet at Toulon, or the failure of the Ukrainian fleet to scuttle in Crimea (more recently - although AFAIK most of those ships are so outdated they're being turned into museum pieces or scrapped anyways).

you understand that "destroying" a ship only means making it incapable of fighting or retreating? In real life noone will just blow ship to pieces when it is already helpless.

In comparison self-destructing can be planned and well implemented rendering every important part of the ship useless.

If you want other RL examples take a look to buildings. What happens when building gets destroyed by external attack (for example 9/11 or earthquakes) and when people making it "self-destructs" (preparing it to blow placing explosives in right places, etc...). Results are totally different.

Yes, in Eve we get the same result: wreck. But this is only because of lazy game mechanics.

Velator? Can be sold???