There exists in New Eden an injustice. That is hardly going to be a controversial statement because injustices are perceived in every nook and cranny of this vast universe and most people have their own interpretations for what the word encompasses.
This injustice however impacts all pilots alike. And yet, it will gather exceedingly little support.
This is the injustice: the pilot is not the sovereign master of their ship.
How is that? When they initiate the self-destruct mechanism of their ship, they cannot choose to detonate the charges immediately and they have to wait 2 minutes. 2 Minutes in a fire fight is an interminable amount of time.
Why is that important? A pilot might choose to deny their assailant a kill mail resulting from the destruction of their ship and/or their pod. A self-destruct sequence that triggers the destruction of the ship immediately before any hostile fire lands, would deny them a kill mail.
Consider the following: any pilot in space may be attacked anywhere, at any time, by any party, for any reason. Their ship is subject to destruction. The ship is, typically, not returned. The loss is permanent. The pilot suffers the real consequence of existing in New Eden’s space. It is not this author’s opinion, nor should it be so construed, to deny anyone the opportunity to engage with any other pilot for their own purposes. Life in New Eden is harsh and brutal and losses can be exceedingly costly, this is how life presents itself to the average pod pilot. The victim bears the brunt of that loss. The loss may or may not have strategic consequences, depending on who was engaged, when, where, why and how.
What it boils down to is that pilots are subject to the play style of other pilots who choose this kind of engagement. And they should never be discouraged from doing so.
However, and here is the crux of the argument: nobody should inflict their play style on anyone else without there being a consequence. In this case: denying an assailant a kill mail. It would be just as important to deny an assailant (here intended to be read as: one or more people engaging in non-consensual combat) a kill mail as it is for the assailant to acquire one. For precisely the same reason.
Why is it the victim’s place to only suffer all the downside of the engagement without an opportunity to fight back even in a mostly abstract way? An insta-pop self-destruct would allow the pilot to have the last remaining moment of control over their own ship: the ability to destroy it instantaneously and to deny the assailant the prize of the ‘honour' of having killed the ship and receiving a report card for it.
Lest it needs to be pointed out: the pilot performing the self-destruct sequence is not winning anything. Rather, they lose their entire ship, fitting and the content of the hold. And, maybe even their capsule. Hardly an occasion to triumphantly rejoice.
It would be trivial for the makers of all this phantasmagorical beauty to reconfigure the self-destruct mechanism such that the pilot could choose to self-destruct immediately, thereby denying an assailant a kill mail.
By making this exceedingly small change to the environment, the pod pilot can be granted the ultimate in self-governance: the ability to destroy it instantaneously and in this way to ‘fight back’ against their assailant by denying them their prize. In so doing an injustice would be rectified and the capsuleer would gain the ultimate sovereignty over their own ship.
This injustice however impacts all pilots alike. And yet, it will gather exceedingly little support.
This is the injustice: the pilot is not the sovereign master of their ship.
How is that? When they initiate the self-destruct mechanism of their ship, they cannot choose to detonate the charges immediately and they have to wait 2 minutes. 2 Minutes in a fire fight is an interminable amount of time.
Why is that important? A pilot might choose to deny their assailant a kill mail resulting from the destruction of their ship and/or their pod. A self-destruct sequence that triggers the destruction of the ship immediately before any hostile fire lands, would deny them a kill mail.
Consider the following: any pilot in space may be attacked anywhere, at any time, by any party, for any reason. Their ship is subject to destruction. The ship is, typically, not returned. The loss is permanent. The pilot suffers the real consequence of existing in New Eden’s space. It is not this author’s opinion, nor should it be so construed, to deny anyone the opportunity to engage with any other pilot for their own purposes. Life in New Eden is harsh and brutal and losses can be exceedingly costly, this is how life presents itself to the average pod pilot. The victim bears the brunt of that loss. The loss may or may not have strategic consequences, depending on who was engaged, when, where, why and how.
What it boils down to is that pilots are subject to the play style of other pilots who choose this kind of engagement. And they should never be discouraged from doing so.
However, and here is the crux of the argument: nobody should inflict their play style on anyone else without there being a consequence. In this case: denying an assailant a kill mail. It would be just as important to deny an assailant (here intended to be read as: one or more people engaging in non-consensual combat) a kill mail as it is for the assailant to acquire one. For precisely the same reason.
Why is it the victim’s place to only suffer all the downside of the engagement without an opportunity to fight back even in a mostly abstract way? An insta-pop self-destruct would allow the pilot to have the last remaining moment of control over their own ship: the ability to destroy it instantaneously and to deny the assailant the prize of the ‘honour' of having killed the ship and receiving a report card for it.
Lest it needs to be pointed out: the pilot performing the self-destruct sequence is not winning anything. Rather, they lose their entire ship, fitting and the content of the hold. And, maybe even their capsule. Hardly an occasion to triumphantly rejoice.
It would be trivial for the makers of all this phantasmagorical beauty to reconfigure the self-destruct mechanism such that the pilot could choose to self-destruct immediately, thereby denying an assailant a kill mail.
By making this exceedingly small change to the environment, the pod pilot can be granted the ultimate in self-governance: the ability to destroy it instantaneously and in this way to ‘fight back’ against their assailant by denying them their prize. In so doing an injustice would be rectified and the capsuleer would gain the ultimate sovereignty over their own ship.
No comments:
Post a Comment