These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Defenses for freighters
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-11-07 06:57:38 UTC
GallowsCalibrator wrote:
Keko Khaan wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
there is a defensive module for freighters.

it's called common sense.


"dont put anything worthy in it".


yeah, common sense. Don't carry 20b isk worth of freight in your freighter, you don't get ganked!




Not true. I saw freighter gank few days ago with just 4 billion inside it. I wont mind suicide ganking freighters with really valuable cargo inside but currently they are too easy to gank as you cant even put few billions worth of minerals in them or you will get suicide ganked.
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-11-07 07:05:07 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Keko Khaan wrote:
Id like to see either more EHP or fitting options like DCU etc. In current state freighters are ridiculous easy to suicide gank in hisec with just few ships. And i think its wrong for such expensive and long training capital sized transport ship. I know alliance that bought titan only by ganking freighters...


Maybe freighter pilots shouldn't be idiots who carry so much isk in their stupid fat freighters? Freighters don't get ganked unless their contents are worth substantially more than the amount it'd cost in tornados to gank them - which is a decent lump of isk.


Maybe you shouldnt be such idiot in your fat hull. Stop talking that nonsense allready.
Nowdays freighters do get ganked alot just with few billions worth of minerals in it. And fact is they are so easy to gank that youy can do it just with 600million invest while only the hull of freighter costs 1,4billion. And you can make profit if freighter has +1billion in cargo.

And just for the record it was you who called someones "idiots in their fat hulls". So i returned that favor no offense.. Twisted
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2012-11-08 07:51:30 UTC
Just to add that i think the main problem with highsec freighter ganks is these "new" tech 3 battlecruisers such as talos. Problem is that they are pretty cheap compared to BS and yet still they have 8 x large guns with nice dps. As if they would be desinged for high sec ganking. And i think freighters EHP should be relooked to face those guns from talos etc.
Dave stark
#24 - 2012-11-08 09:08:19 UTC
Keko Khaan wrote:
Just to add that i think the main problem with highsec freighter ganks is these "new" tech 3 battlecruisers such as talos. Problem is that they are pretty cheap compared to BS and yet still they have 8 x large guns with nice dps. As if they would be desinged for high sec ganking. And i think freighters EHP should be relooked to face those guns from talos etc.


i'm still not convinced the dps/isk ratio has changed much. sure those ships do more dps, however last time i checked they were also more expensive.

i'm not convinced that just because it's easier it has become more profitable.
i'm more convinced that people over filling their cargo has made it more profitable.
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#25 - 2012-11-08 10:06:42 UTC
These ships are behemoths and are specialized in transporting large amounts of goods. Their tradeoff is that they move, align and warp like a slug in December.

That being said, they have nearly no defensive capabilities and while normally I like the fact that stuff isn't safe in HighSec I do believe that there should be some attainable defense for any ship.

Currently, it's quite laughable at how easy it is to pop one of these very expensive ships and maybe the right balance is to treat the tech 1 versions as they are treated now while the tech 2 versions get the added bonus of the resists of that of the transport (tech 2 haulers) ships. This would bring them more in line with the tech 2 hauling line and/or more balanced in the wake of the mining (ORE) ships.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-11-08 10:40:26 UTC
Keko Khaan wrote:
Id like to see either more EHP or fitting options like DCU etc. In current state freighters are ridiculous easy to suicide gank in hisec with just few ships. And i think its wrong for such expensive and long training capital sized transport ship. I know alliance that bought titan only by ganking freighters...

As if anyone would care to fit a tank. It has been proven time and time again that the only way you could make people fit a tank is by making it impossible to use anything other than tanking mods, at which point CCP might as well just buff the HP or resists and upping the costs of the hull a bit.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-11-08 10:42:21 UTC
Quesa wrote:
These ships are behemoths and are specialized in transporting large amounts of goods. Their tradeoff is that they move, align and warp like a slug in December.

That being said, they have nearly no defensive capabilities and while normally I like the fact that stuff isn't safe in HighSec I do believe that there should be some attainable defense for any ship.

Pre-retribution: bring a few corpmates with ships that can go pew pew if you have to move expensive ****. They can shoot the gankers.
Post-retribution: just laugh as everyone can shoot the gankers.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-11-08 14:23:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Alundil wrote:
It would require real collision physics and at that point we'd see frigs and dessies being bumped into the middle of the next system after tangling with something with several orders of magnitude more mass than they have.
Actually the collision system can be easily solved with 5th grade math. Observe:

Megathron (98,400,000kg) is traveling 144m/s heading 67% x (positive), 25% y (positive), and 8% z (positive), when a MWDing Rifter (1,567,000kg) flying along at a tremendous 3010m/s comes up underneath it headed 13% x (negative), 7% y (negative), and 80% z (positive) and slams it from underneath.

The Rifter is 1.59% of the Megathron's mass, and so it changes the Megathron's course by that much, while that much energy is exerted back in resistance from the Megathron into the Rifter, pushing it along the Megathron's heading. So the Megathron's new heading is: 65.7% x (positive), 24.5% y (positive), and 9.1% z (positive), meaning it has a net speed now of 143m/s...

While the Rifter bounces off at 107% x (positive), 41% y (positive), and 64% z (negative) at -- which is a net speed of 6381m/s.

I probably did that math wrong somewhere, but the point I'm making is that not only is it easy for the server to compute, it also won't send any frigates flying at insane speeds, because you have to calculate the mass of the object you're hitting as well as the mass of the object it's being hit with. The Rifter here is only taking on a small amount of the Megathron's inertia, because it's only changing a small amount of it. Most of that inertia stays in the Megathron.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
#29 - 2012-11-08 15:24:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Vulpine
If you're going for off-the-wall ideas,

Give freighters a number of specialist subsystem like slots.
Fitting a "subsystem" uses up some of your transport capacity but grants you a bonus.
Then add BPOs for some capital scale "subsystems". 10k m3 size, consumes 20k m3 (base capacity) if fitted, maybe add 17 of them.
4 for shield (1 per resist), 4 for armor (1 per resist), 4 for structure (1 per resist), 1 for "Inertia".

Resist modules add 1% base resist (treated as a passive resist so resist skills apply)
"Inertia" makes you align more slowly but can't be knocked off course, if you get bumped you are still pointing in the same direction as before.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2012-11-08 15:26:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Or just don't run around completely unprotected in a freighter with 20b+ in the cargohold.

Edit: I mean, we're throwing out outlandish ideas here, right? vOv

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-11-08 15:33:20 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Or just don't run around completely unprotected in a freighter with 20b+ in the cargohold.

Edit: I mean, we're throwing out outlandish ideas here, right? vOv

It would be nice if you could safely put more than 1 bil in it. It doesn't have to be 20 bil. Howabout 2 bil?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
#32 - 2012-11-08 17:25:11 UTC
If you are talking about 20B worth and being outlandish then I'm all for something stupidly heavily shielded and armoured, high skill requirement to fly and an area that can be rammed by a Frig that causes the current pilot to be ejected. Whoever is sitting in it when it docks up wins a prize :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#33 - 2012-11-08 17:59:09 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
It would be nice if you could safely put more than 1 bil in it. It doesn't have to be 20 bil. Howabout 2 bil?
As luck would have it, you can safely put 2bil in it.
Previous page12