EVE General Discussion

How is the cargo any indication as to what the pilot can or cannot do with their ship or have any basis on it's mechanic?

I don't think 5 minutes would be "excessive" to the point you need to refresh mechanic timers to "hold" a ship in place.

Especially as a war target a scram should work just fine.

Yes they are.

An Obelisk does not have the slots to incur any act of aggression.

In a game based on combat, that's pretty ******* special.

And sorry, but pulling the plug to escape death is simply going to be a cost of having players play a game based on servers and electricity.

When you talk about people buying plex to turn into isk and using a real world currency in to game currency, some things are going to matter more.

Such as giving the ability to pull the plug.

Don't treat that fine line without care.

Is this debate still going on? To busy getting ready for our next ganks to notice I guess

That's ok, some of us can multitask =)

Reminds me of the time.......

Yet, being one who was also ganked in a freighter, it would be nice to have a counter action to the common
freighter gank or at minimum a timer of how long someone can bump you before they get an aggression flag or concord starts to play with them.

1) Say once a player collides with same player 3 times within "X" minutes, it starts a bump timer and after another "X" minutes they are flagged for aggression.
2) Ganking a freighter should have a bit more strategy to it.
3) The player that is bumping should also be at risk of losing their ship..... it's only fair - at least from the gankies points of view.

All players should at least have a consequence.

Yes. Because there are ways around it, they are victimizing themselves. That's why they get blamed. Especially when they don't want to admit their act of stupidity and come on the forums to cry.



Wrong. If you are the one arguing for change, the onus is on you to prove the need for change. Thus far, you have not. Especially considering that in just about all of these cases the attack could have been avoided or the freighter was carrying a ludicrously high amount of loot, and thus warranted the attack.

So please, lay out the proof before us that this is in epidemic of freighters being blown up, and how there is nothing any of them could possibly have done to avoid it.

This should be good if you attempt it, but I suspect you won't.

…but still incurs an aggression timer to ensure that he can't just log off to save himself. This is intentional. Freighters have a special page in the history of abuses where this comes into play, which is why that particular loophole has been closed.

They're already like other ships. Their benefits are already balanced (or, more accurately, maxed out — again, giving them slots would only ever make them worse).

Regardless of whatever (not actually) special traits you want to dream up for them, the aggression flagging system is still such a base mechanic that all ships must abide by them: they're specifically there to remove all manners of tricks and rule abuse that might save your ship.

Yes. And that point has been defined by CCP already: when you keep following a player around and pestering him no matter where he goes and what he tries to do.

A single gank is not harassment for the simple reason that no-one is being followed around and continuously pestered, and that the target is the ship, not the player. It's a single occurrence; it's done for profit; it has all the hallmarks of a legitimate attacks on players; it has none of the hallmarks of harassment or greifing.

For reference:

· Bumping, shooting, and generally making the life miserable for everyone in a system rich on belts 23.5/7/365 — not harassment (the victims can choose a different system; the aggressors are pursuing the legitimate goal of taking the system as their own and earning ISK from it).
· Bumping, shooting, and generally making the life miserable (again 23.5/7/365) for anyone who jumps into a system with too much cargo — not harassment (the victim can choose a different route; the aggressors are pursuing the legitimate goal of blockading the system and earning ISK from it).
· Bumping, shooting, and generally making the life miserable of a single player no matter where he goes and what he tries to do — harassment (the victim is being specifically and personally targeted and his only solution is to not play the game).

The line you're talking about gets drawn after several days, not arbitrarily inside the timeframe of a single attack.

Why wouldn't it be ok? It's great that the game allows for these kinds of drawn-out struggles between players, where they constantly wrestle to gain the upper hand. If the OP felt that the outcome was given and there was no point in fighting, it wouldn't have lasted for 60 minutes — again, this tactic relies on it being done in 15 minutes because beyond that, the entire setup is reset since you have to restart the aggression flag. He chose to extend the confrontation just as much as the gankers did.

The line was not crossed here because the OP kept pushing it in front of him.

No one has said otherwise.

The very reason this mechanic was added into the game was to prevent victims who are aggressed from logging off. To claim it is griefing because it is being used to prevent players logging off is simply bizarre.

What you want is to have freighter pilots have ~special rules~ put in place to make them safer, but no such thing is necessary. They are able to perform their role more than adequately as they are with a very good level of safety. What you want is for them to be able to move much higher value items with impunity - well, that's not their role and CCP has various other classes of ship to help.

When you stop being lazy, your risk is very low.

It was proven to be harassment. He was followed numerous times. Via logoffs, other pilots disengaging their GCC and being replaced by alts, following war points. All of this has been mentioned.