Player Features and Ideas Discussion

1. This is relevant to counter terrorism how?
2. This will not prevent you from being ganked, if people see that you have shiny modules, they will kill you for laughs first, profit second.
3. No one will equip this.

Why would you want to put a mechanism in the game to deny loot to victor of a PvP engagement? Wouldn't that reduce the reasons for pirates and other players to attack another ship?

There has never been one single post from CCP that says EVE is built on the principle that pirates are priviledged over any other class of pilot. There is no honor or victor in EVE, since there is no estabilished objective. There is no reason to assume that you "deserve the loot" more than I deserve the right to deny you from it the same way there is no reason for preventing you to denying me the opportunity to enjoy the game without using weapons.

If one is entitled to griefplay, everyone must be.

But I would set for making it so this module only works in destroying everything if you have to activate it manually to destroy your ship prior to the ship's "third part driven destruction", preventing it from "game playing itself".

Cute. Does the newbie intro include a little 2 paragraph disclaimer informing people of this fact? The mental correlation between highsec and 'green zones' in other MMOs is natural. Don't insult my intelligence and pretend that EVE isn't misleadingly advertised as something its not by a lot of people, in a lot of places.

What is written is one thing, what you understand is another.

Regardless of how you understand, if something is not literally written, it is not. No matter how much you, or any other person repeats it to the exhaustion.

Tell you to expect or be prepared for something is one thing. Tell you that thing is the goal, another entirely.

But it is really impossible to make a distinction when you know the person knows the truth but is driven by the sole idea that there is a moral high ground that makes his claims right regardless of what is written.

In the EVE official forums in english it works like this: There are 10 or 12 people who say the same about everything, and distributes their network of egg drollers to keep repeating it.

If it is something that is written X and the bandwagon is not X, no matter how much that X is written, in their minds there is truth in making an argument that X means not X.

If it is something that is not written, in their minds there is truth in making an argument the mere mention of something remotely related is the proof of X being "the underline cause".

Anyhow, there is always someone to say exactly the same thing about exactly the same false argument that what CCP says can happen in EVE is saying that MUST happen and is the entire purpose of the game.

People often even pass by the argument of the thing said itself to make an argument over the same thing everyone of the "network" repeats all the time. Which is quoted using text that doesnt really says that.

Maybe that is the answer for the post asking about CCP and reddit.

Almost all of the rest of your reply was incomprehensible to me. But as to this, CCP is not saying something must happen or that piracy is the entire purpose of the game. In fact, most people play the game without ever committing a piratical act. But what they are saying is that Eve is a PvP sandbox where such piracy is possible.

Your "idea" actually makes piracy impossible, or at least impossible if people fit this module. It removes conflict and a play style from the sandbox. How at all does that make Eve a better game?

This thread is also quite redundant: 1, 2, 3. I will report it as such.

You can deny loot by having friends instapop wrecks.

1.) terrorism isn't the same as piracy, and terrorists don't care for your loot
2.) as a terrorist, I would most definitely be a lot more willing to shoot at you because you have one of these fitted

3.) you might need some Ice for that burn.

Yeah but you put the effort into it, not some modules doing it for you.

Black Pedro has not schooled anyone on anything, he has posted links that prove he has the right to gank, but no where in any of those links does it specifically state that he has a right to any loot that might be created as a result of that gank. The topic of the OP was to deny the loot, not to deny that right or chance to gank and as such Black Pedro's links are worthless at proving the point that he has a right to the loot.

To the OP I give you a -1 because as the others have posted there are ways to prevent the ganker from obtaining the loot once your ship has died.

Having said all of that the basic idea behind the OP's post is not without some merit.
If a player only has 1 account there is no way for them to use the existing mechanics to deny the ganker the loot and to me that is something that we could and probably should look at. Even a player with a single account should have a mechanic available to them that could be sued to deny a ganker the loot, perhaps shortening the delay timer on the self destruct is what is needed so there is a realistic chance of the ship and cargo exploding before the gank is completed. Having it go off no matter what if it was activated prior to the ship being exploded is another thought.