These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing bumping and looting mechanics

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#861 - 2016-02-04 22:08:46 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Decoy
I have removed 8+ pages of garbage. Please follow our rules, stay on topic, remain respectful, and lower the troll factor!

Quote:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

8. Use of profanity is prohibited.

The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.

19. New player bashing will not be tolerated.

New members of the EVE Online community are encouraged to use, but are not restricted to the EVE New Citizens Q&A forum. This forum is specifically designed to provide a platform for those who are new to the EVE community to ask questions and learn more about EVE. More experienced forum users are encouraged to participate by assisting new players with helpful and courteous responses. All flaming, trolling and posts of a derogatory nature will be deleted, and will be considered a severe breach of the forum rules.

20. All posts must be related to EVE Online.

Posts regarding other companies and products or services are prohibited and any content of this nature will be removed. Posts regarding other games are however permitted on the Out of Pod Experience forum for the purposes of discussion only.

23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.

If the garbage continues I will close the thread, but I'm hoping meaningful discussion can continue. Blink

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#862 - 2016-02-04 22:55:27 UTC
ISD Decoy wrote:
I have removed 8+ pages of garbage. Please follow our rules, stay on topic, remain respectful, and lower the troll factor!
If the garbage continues I will close the thread, but I'm hoping meaningful discussion can continue. Blink


thank you for keeping it open isd decoy

o7
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#863 - 2016-02-04 23:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: bigbud skunkafella
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
[quote=bigbud skunkafella]
i have made several suggestions , mostly in an attempt to find a balance that involves more player driven content ie fun , rather than suspect/criminal timers as some have suggested.

if any opponents have anything more substantial to say , hell , even a suggestion themselves for the sake of discussion, please let's hear it .
Ok. Radical idea incoming to remove bumping:

Freighters (eventually maybe all capitals) do not generate a criminal flag in highsec if pointed/scrambled, while other aggressive modules still do. However, if you apply a point to a capital, you immediately go suspect. Freighters are then given a super MJD they can fit that warps them 500 km with a reasonably long (3-5 minutes?) spool-up time.

Pros: freighter escorts can clear off the tackler with guns and no CONCORD response
Cons: freighters are subject to harassment by non-committed attackers or tanky tacklers

Discuss.


would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?

edit; perhaps only allow the suspect tackle to occur in 0.5 systems to prevent abuse ?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#864 - 2016-02-04 23:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
[quote=bigbud skunkafella]
i have made several suggestions , mostly in an attempt to find a balance that involves more player driven content ie fun , rather than suspect/criminal timers as some have suggested.

if any opponents have anything more substantial to say , hell , even a suggestion themselves for the sake of discussion, please let's hear it .
Ok. Radical idea incoming to remove bumping:

Freighters (eventually maybe all capitals) do not generate a criminal flag in highsec if pointed/scrambled, while other aggressive modules still do. However, if you apply a point to a capital, you immediately go suspect. Freighters are then given a super MJD they can fit that warps them 500 km with a reasonably long (3-5 minutes?) spool-up time.

Pros: freighter escorts can clear off the tackler with guns and no CONCORD response
Cons: freighters are subject to harassment by non-committed attackers or tanky tacklers

Discuss.


would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?


How about no, but a scram cause a criminal flag--i.e. invoke CONCORD.

Edit:

No, after thinking about it I think Black Pedro's idea is fine without exempting scramblers. If the guy uses a point he'd better have the gank fleet ready to go or nearly so.

For the case with a scram...well, it is a capital ship you should have an escort.

Oh, and I prefer bumping since it is an awesome example of emergent game play and player innovation.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Iain Cariaba
#865 - 2016-02-04 23:17:57 UTC
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
if we look at bumping in hisec in it's current form logically the ability of a person to obstruct another person by deliberately ramming their ship to prevent them entering warp for a potentially unlimited amount of time with the intent of holding them there until they can be murdered and robbed by a bunch of cutthroat pirates while the relevant authorities take no action makes no sense whatsoever.

A decent analogy for freighter bumping is the old ghetto analogy. A freighter flying through areas where gankers operate is like walking through the ghetto. A smart person walking through this ghetto carries little cash, pay attention to his surroundings, brings friends if possible, hell, maybe even brings a car to make the trip quickly. When you tape a $100 bill to your forehead, wear a blindfold, and lay down to take a nap, you can't be surprised when someone comes over, beats the crap out of you, and takes everything you've got., and yes, this even happens right in front of police stations in the ghettos I've lived in.

Translation to EvE:
Smart pilot: Don't lload billions into a freighter. Check killboards for ganks along your route,put known bumpers on watchlist so you know if they're on, use other basic intel tools. Bring a scout. Bring webs to get you out faster
The other guy: Loads multiple times his hull's value in the hold, doesn't use scouts, doesn't use webs and takes almost a minute to warp off the gate.


Remember, highsec isn't the suburbs, it's the ghetto. Lowsec is the slums. Nullsec is a dictatorial 3rd world country. Wormholes are the badlands from Mad Max.

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
a vast majority of genuinely neutral observers would look at this and agree it's akin to the example an opponent of any change to this mechanic made , ie a hijacked truck being rammed off the road by another truck for an hour or more before actually being hijacked and robbed while the authorities did nothing till the actual hijack /robbery took place.

Actually, the hijacked truck is a bad analogy. The one above is far more fitting.

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
most, if not all opponents in this thread have a direct stake in maintaining the status quo, and have contributed little to the discussion apart from hot air and trolling in an apparent attempt to close the thread.

Or, maybe most of them are like me. The status quo doesn't matter as much as keeping the sandbox from being used by the local cats.

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
I have made several suggestions , mostly in an attempt to find a balance that involves more player driven content ie fun , rather than suspect/criminal timers as some have suggested.

The issue here is you're trying to balance something that is only perceived as unbalanced due to one side being either afraid or unwilling to do anything about it without coded permission. The imbalance is in the player attitudes, not the mechanic.

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
if any opponents have anything more substantial to say , hell , even a suggestion themselves for the sake of discussion, please let's hear it .

I had a good one that apparently got misplaced in the purge.

Every member of the AG crowd dedicates one character slot and trains up an anti-bumper ganking alt. Then, they spend a couple hours a week participating in coordinated anti-bumper ganks to protect freighters.

The AG crowd claims gankers are afraid of real PvP, this is their chance to prove it.
The ganker community claims elite Pvper status, also their chance to prove it.

The AG crowd can still bear away on their mains without risking their precious sec status or worrying about those evil killrights.

The ganker community gets some good fights, and maybe a bit more respect from the AG crowd once they learn that coordinating those ganks isn't the "easy kills" they think it is.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#866 - 2016-02-04 23:22:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?
None of the other modules in the MJD family are immune to scrams, why should this proposed module be any different?

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Mag's
Azn Empire
#867 - 2016-02-04 23:28:27 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?
None of the other modules in the MJD family are immune to scrams, why should this proposed module be any different?
Because of the rampant troll tackling that's happening in empty systems, throughout highsec of course. Didn't you know?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#868 - 2016-02-04 23:36:53 UTC
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?


If:

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
those ideas certainly have merit , it would make some sort of freighter escort essential and create lots of content .


is true, how would troll tackling in an empty system occur?
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#869 - 2016-02-04 23:54:35 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?
None of the other modules in the MJD family are immune to scrams, why should this proposed module be any different?
Because of the rampant troll tackling that's happening in empty systems, throughout highsec of course. Didn't you know?


yes , it would probably become an issue if pedros suggestion came to pass, i'm discussing his proposal in a constructive manner, while u... ?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#870 - 2016-02-04 23:58:01 UTC
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?
None of the other modules in the MJD family are immune to scrams, why should this proposed module be any different?
Because of the rampant troll tackling that's happening in empty systems, throughout highsec of course. Didn't you know?


yes , it would probably become an issue if pedros suggestion came to pass, i'm discussing his proposal in a constructive manner, while u... ?
Constructive? Oh you're in that frame of mind atm. Cool. How about answering those questions?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#871 - 2016-02-04 23:59:09 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
would your proposed super mjd be immune to scram so the freighter would have some means of escape from being permanently troll tackled in an empty system ?


If:

bigbud skunkafella wrote:
those ideas certainly have merit , it would make some sort of freighter escort essential and create lots of content .


is true, how would troll tackling in an empty system occur?


there are hundreds of freighters plying their trade at any one point in the game, in response to pedros suggestion, i am trying to work out the pitfalls in a constructive manner, u got anything constructive to add , lets hear it, otherwise please carry on and i'll hide your posts to spend time discussing the topic of this thread with people who have some decent input to share .
thanks
Brad Neece
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#872 - 2016-02-04 23:59:18 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:


Besides, you're talking about a change that has limited scope inside highsec, but a much, much broader impact in other areas. Trying to pawn this off as CCP catering to Goonswarm is disingenuous.


if you want to call guaranteed freighter wreck looting by miniluv /code of limited scope inside highsec then u just go ahead.

The only reason it's guaranteed is because AG are too scared to field the half a dozen thrashers to stop them.

Again, the options are there. If they fail to use them, it's entire their fault.



so ag should just reship from their limited numbers of logi/ecm/pew pew ships into thrashers to pop a possibly empty wreck?

They should be aware enough of the situation to recognize when the anti-gank has failed, and already be reshipping before the freighter pops. Just stage ship near where the ganks usually happen, just like the gankers do.

Or, they could simply stop trying to save people from their own compounded failures and just simply undock in the ships to pop the wreck in the first place.


Well there are times the ganks fail at 10% hull because reps were applied....So at what point do you become aware enough of the situation to change ships?
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#873 - 2016-02-05 00:03:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
there are hundreds of freighters plying their trade at any one point in the game, in response to pedros suggestion, i am trying to work out the pitfalls in a constructive manner, u got anything constructive to add , lets hear it,

What pitfalls?

You yourself acknowledged that the proposal has merit on the basis of making some sort of escort essential.

If an escort is essential, then how can a freighter be troll tackled in an empty system?

That's not trolling. It's asking a simple question on the basis of the information already added to the thread.

If an escort is essential, how does one get permanently troll tackled?

Constructive question, hoping for a constructive answer.

Surely for example, if the freighter pilot was silly enough to not have the essential escort and is tackled, he could just burn back to the gate slowly and jump through, then continue on his journey a different way, or get an escort to assist him?

So a permanent troll tackle doesn't even seem possible at all with current mechanics modified by the proposal. So how would it be possible, even without the essential escort?
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#874 - 2016-02-05 00:14:26 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
there are hundreds of freighters plying their trade at any one point in the game, in response to pedros suggestion, i am trying to work out the pitfalls in a constructive manner, u got anything constructive to add , lets hear it,

What pitfalls?

You yourself acknowledged that the proposal has merit on the basis of making some sort of escort essential.

If an escort is essential, then how can a freighter be troll tackled in an empty system?

That's not trolling. It's asking a simple question on the basis of the information already added to the thread.

If an escort is essential, how does one get permanently troll tackled?

Constructive question, hoping for a constructive answer.


if, as pedro suggests tackling a freighter is to become a suspect level offence , then there is nothing to prevent troll tackling indefinitely of any unescorted freighters in an empty or near empty system , which would just replace the problem of unlimited bumping with unlimited tackle. hence my suggestion that the tackle is only allowed in 0.5 systems to prevent abuse of this mechanic.

his idea has some merit as i said, let's discuss .
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#875 - 2016-02-05 00:17:30 UTC
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
there are hundreds of freighters plying their trade at any one point in the game, in response to pedros suggestion, i am trying to work out the pitfalls in a constructive manner, u got anything constructive to add , lets hear it,

What pitfalls?

You yourself acknowledged that the proposal has merit on the basis of making some sort of escort essential.

If an escort is essential, then how can a freighter be troll tackled in an empty system?

That's not trolling. It's asking a simple question on the basis of the information already added to the thread.

If an escort is essential, how does one get permanently troll tackled?

Constructive question, hoping for a constructive answer.


if, as pedro suggests tackling a freighter is to become a suspect level offence , then there is nothing to prevent troll tackling indefinitely of any unescorted freighters in an empty or near empty system , which would just replace the problem of unlimited bumping with unlimited tackle. hence my suggestion that the tackle is only allowed in 0.5 systems to prevent abuse of this mechanic.

his idea has some merit as i said, let's discuss .

Adding my above edit here to explain my thinking:

If the freighter pilot was silly enough to not have the essential escort and is tackled, he could just burn back to the gate slowly and jump through, then continue on his journey a different way, or get an escort to assist him?

So a permanent troll tackle is not possible at all with current mechanics modified by the proposal. So how would it be possible, even without the essential escort?
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#876 - 2016-02-05 00:35:39 UTC  |  Edited by: bigbud skunkafella
Iain Cariaba wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
if we look at bumping in hisec in it's current form logically the ability of a person to obstruct another person by deliberately ramming their ship to prevent them entering warp for a potentially unlimited amount of time with the intent of holding them there until they can be murdered and robbed by a bunch of cutthroat pirates while the relevant authorities take no action makes no sense whatsoever.

A decent analogy for freighter bumping is the old ghetto analogy. A freighter flying through areas where gankers operate is like walking through the ghetto. A smart person walking through this ghetto carries little cash, pay attention to his surroundings, brings friends if possible, hell, maybe even brings a car to make the trip quickly. When you tape a $100 bill to your forehead, wear a blindfold, and lay down to take a nap, you can't be surprised when someone comes over, beats the crap out of you, and takes everything you've got., and yes, this even happens right in front of police stations in the ghettos I've lived in.

Translation to EvE:
Smart pilot: Don't lload billions into a freighter. Check killboards for ganks along your route,put known bumpers on watchlist so you know if they're on, use other basic intel tools. Bring a scout. Bring webs to get you out faster
The other guy: Loads multiple times his hull's value in the hold, doesn't use scouts, doesn't use webs and takes almost a minute to warp off the gate.


Remember, highsec isn't the suburbs, it's the ghetto. Lowsec is the slums. Nullsec is a dictatorial 3rd world country. Wormholes are the badlands from Mad Max.

[quote=bigbud skunkafella]a vast majority of genuinely neutral observers would look at this and agree it's akin to the example an opponent of any change to this mechanic made , ie a hijacked truck being rammed off the road by another truck for an hour or more before actually being hijacked and robbed while the authorities did nothing till the actual hijack /robbery took place.

Actually, the hijacked truck is a bad analogy. The one above is far more fitting.

so you're trying to tell me that even in the worst ghettos in the world, the authorities would stand by and do absolutely nothing if trucks empty or otherwise passing thru were regularly rammed repeatedly for hours before being hijacked/robbed and would only respond at the moment of actual robbery/hijack ? Roll

edit; soz, messed up quotes again lol
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#877 - 2016-02-05 00:41:22 UTC  |  Edited by: bigbud skunkafella
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
there are hundreds of freighters plying their trade at any one point in the game, in response to pedros suggestion, i am trying to work out the pitfalls in a constructive manner, u got anything constructive to add , lets hear it,

What pitfalls?

You yourself acknowledged that the proposal has merit on the basis of making some sort of escort essential.

If an escort is essential, then how can a freighter be troll tackled in an empty system?

That's not trolling. It's asking a simple question on the basis of the information already added to the thread.

If an escort is essential, how does one get permanently troll tackled?

Constructive question, hoping for a constructive answer.


if, as pedro suggests tackling a freighter is to become a suspect level offence , then there is nothing to prevent troll tackling indefinitely of any unescorted freighters in an empty or near empty system , which would just replace the problem of unlimited bumping with unlimited tackle. hence my suggestion that the tackle is only allowed in 0.5 systems to prevent abuse of this mechanic.

his idea has some merit as i said, let's discuss .

Adding my above edit here to explain my thinking:

If the freighter pilot was silly enough to not have the essential escort and is tackled, he could just burn back to the gate slowly and jump through, then continue on his journey a different way, or get an escort to assist him?

So a permanent troll tackle is not possible at all with current mechanics modified by the proposal. So how would it be possible, even without the essential escort?


of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?

edit; my thinking is that if this change was implemented then it would be very open to abuse if it was available in every hisec system . limiting it to 0.5 systems would help alleviate some of the potential for abuse , and create hot spots for content, as the systems would attract those interested in pvp .
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#878 - 2016-02-05 00:48:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?
True enough for the fleetmate, not for the tackle due to weapons timers, however that risk is there for every ship, not just freighters. Also please explain the term troll tackle.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#879 - 2016-02-05 00:49:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?

Of course there is:

- Weapons timer which restricts jumping for 60 seconds

So if the tackle drops point to be able to jump, the freighter can align and warp.

If the tackle maintains tackle to prevent warp, the freighter jumps and warps.

An Obelisk with 3 x Reinforced Bulkheads aligns in 46.5 seconds. My freighter pilot aligns in 52.7 sec with that fit. So there is no way for 1 person to prevent jumping back and warping, or just warping off if he wants to be able to jump through. There is no freighter that takes >60 seconds to align.

If the extension is now that a freighter can be troll tackled in 2 empty systems because he didn't bring his essential escort, then where does it end?

How many concessions needs to be made before you agree that enough is enough and at some point, the Freighter pilot also has to take some responsibility for the situation?

Why for example couldn't he jump in Corp chat, or anti-ganking, or gank-intel, or any other public chat channel and announce that an easy kill is available for anyone that wants to come?

Why not just do away with flying in space for freighters all together and just let us /moveme command our way from one station to another?

Hopefully that is a ridiculous suggestion to everyone, but at what point between there and jumping back through the gate is enough, enough?

From where I look at it, it seems there is never a point at which the freighter pilot has to be responsible for his decision.

At one point, the suggestion is good because that means content will be generated and an escort will be essential. But then, wait what if someone doesn't take their essential escort, then in additionto removing bumping, MJD mechanics need to be changed as well.

We still need to give them an out?

Easier just to go with a /moveme implementation for freighters.
bigbud skunkafella
Utama Incorporated
Astral Alliance
#880 - 2016-02-05 01:10:14 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
bigbud skunkafella wrote:
of course, theres nothing to stop the troll tackler from jumping bak thru, or having a fleet mate on other side is there?

Of course there is:

- Weapons timer which restricts jumping for 60 seconds

So if the tackle drops point to be able to jump, the freighter can align and warp.

If the tackle maintains tackle to prevent warp, the freighter jumps and warps.

If the extension is now that a freighter can be troll tackled in 2 empty systems because he didn't bring his essential escort, then where does it end?

How many concessions needs to be made before you agree that enough is enough and at some point, the Freighter pilot also has to take some responsibility for the situation?

Why for example couldn't he jump in Corp chat, or anti-ganking, or gank-intel, or any other public chat channel and announce that an easy kill is available for anyone that wants to come?

Why not just do away with flying in space for freighters all together and just let us /moveme command our way from one station to another?

Hopefully that is a ridiculous suggestion to everyone, but at what point between there and jumping back through the gate is enough, enough?

From where I look at it, it seems there is never a point at which the freighter pilot has to be responsible for his decision.

At one point, the suggestion is good because that means content will be generated and an escort will be essential. But then, wait what if someone doesn't take their essential escort, then in additionto removing bumping, MJD mechanics need to be changed as well.

We still need to give them an out?

Easier just to go with a /moveme implementation for freighters.


oh please. if the above proposal went ahead as is , then think of troll tackling and multiply x 2-300 at any one time all over hisec .just try engaging your brain before typing please or i'll have to add you to the list of timewasters whose posts i've already hidden .

so my asking pedro to clarify if his proposed 3-5 minute cycle 'super mjd' would be immune to scram is suddenly ,according to you , me suggesting that mjd mechanics need to be changed? troll harder please. Pirate