These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

ORE Freighter: smaller but armored like a real capital ship
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-11-30 03:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
A lot of folks are complaining that their freighters aren't durable enough. Of course, people explain that we don't want to have giant cheap cargo ships that are also extremely durable and also allowed into highsec.

So I have a proposal for a cargo vessel with significantly reduced carrying capacity over a freighter (but still very large) with capital-level defenses for when you want to haul in dangerous space. Perhaps to balance it out, you can't bring this ship into highsec at all--but it can use stargates in lowsec and nullsec even though it also has a jump drive. It also has several different types of bays, so if you take advantage of several or all of them at once along with cargohold expanders you can net a total amount of storage space similar to a freighter.

ORE Freighter

5 High Power Slots, 0 turret hardpoints, 0 launcher hardpoints
7 Medium Power Slots, 4 Low Power Slots
Drone bandwidth: 125 Mbit/sec
Drone bay space: 25,000m3

ORE Freighter skill bonuses:
+5% cargohold and fleet hangar capacity per level
-4% shield resistances per level
+20% drone damage and hit points per level
Role bonuses:
2x Warp Strength from fitting Warp Core Stabilizers
300% bonus to ship scanners range
+ Can fit Clone Vat Bay
90% reduction to effective distance traveled for jump fatigue

Cargohold: 80,000 m3
Fleet Hangar: 150,000 m3
Mineral Hold: 50,000 m3
Planetary Materials Hold: 50,000 m3
Fuel Bay: 50,000 m3
Ship Maintenance Hangar: 250,000 m3


I'm not sure what hit point/powergrid/capacitor values to use but I'm thinking similar to a Thanatos. Its mineral cost should be similar to a Rorqual but probably a bit cheaper. Powergrid should probably be reduced since it'll mostly be for fitting on-board reps. It doesn't need enough to fit capital modules in the high slots.

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."
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-11-30 03:58:24 UTC
To me it seems like a dumbed down Rorqual...
What you're describing isn't a freighter, it's a mid-ship between the Orca and the Rorqual.
To much functionality to be considered a freighter
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#3 - 2014-11-30 06:30:46 UTC
OR.......
We could just give freighters a real capital ship layout & fitting allowance. And stop automatically gimping all industrial ships.
If someone wants to use their Jump Freighter as a Smart Bomber with it's 6 high slots (as an example), why is this an issue?

By deliberately leaving Industrials gimped on slots and fittings we will always have these issues. If we give them a real fitting layout and allowance comparable to other ships of their size, then we actually create a much more interesting Meta when they are capable in their own right.
Gay Pornstar
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-11-30 07:51:59 UTC
Sounds good. The bonus to warp core stabs is silly though, nothing else has that and nothing should. Lowsec is dead as dogshit and seriously needs some reason for you bears to step out of your cave. Maybe having a faux-carrier hauler is what that takes. The dronebay space is also silly. Id be okay with enough space for 10-15 flights of heavies but not infinite WTF space.

There is an idea of a Gay Pornstar; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#5 - 2014-11-30 08:51:17 UTC
If you want a really tanky Bowhead i have EFT warriored a fit up that has well over 500k ehp against void and not alot less against quake...

Wait, isnt this more of a carrier type thing with the slots and such?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-11-30 10:53:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Gay Pornstar wrote:
The dronebay space is also silly. Id be okay with enough space for 10-15 flights of heavies but not infinite WTF space.

The combat utility of increased drone bay space has a diminishing return. I don't figure there's a huge difference between 500m3 and 25,000m3 drone bay space because it's not very often a ship loses 4 flights of heavies in one outing. At some point your opponent will stop trying to kill the drones and focus on the ship instead. All the rest of the space is just another hauling bay--one that only hauls drones.





Joe Risalo wrote:
To me it seems like a dumbed down Rorqual...
What you're describing isn't a freighter, it's a mid-ship between the Orca and the Rorqual.
To much functionality to be considered a freighter
FireFrenzy wrote:
If you want a really tanky Bowhead i have EFT warriored a fit up that has well over 500k ehp against void and not alot less against quake...

Wait, isnt this more of a carrier type thing with the slots and such?

Orca and Rorqual can fit mining foreman links. They both have pretty big ore holds. The Rorqual can fit an industrial core. Carriers can launch fighters and can fit drone control units. Carriers can also fit triage units. The Bowhead is a dedicated ship-hauler that only hauls ships and has quite a bit more ship maintenance bay than this ORE Freighter, while also being allowed in highsec. None of these can haul nearly as much general cargo as the ORE Freighter I am proposing. It is similar to carriers and the Rorqual in basic fitting options and attributes alone. How again is it similar to any of these things?

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."
Gay Pornstar
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-11-30 19:46:20 UTC
I suppose I have an odd perspective on drone bay space because I have been in a fight where I lost 20 sets of heavies. I see your point. I think the issue the others are having with your concept is that you're calling it a freighter, when it has more similarity to a scaled up combat Blockade Runner. You might benefit from giving it a new name and treating it as a heavily ORE modified Obelisk or something, so much so that it takes your new skill instead of just Gallente Freighter.

There is an idea of a Gay Pornstar; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-11-30 23:54:41 UTC
Gay Pornstar wrote:
You might benefit from giving it a new name and treating it as a heavily ORE modified Obelisk or something, so much so that it takes your new skill instead of just Gallente Freighter.

I was actually hoping to have it use that already existing skill, Capital Industrial Ships, which only has one ship for it so far. I realized after I made this that the new Bowhead takes a new ORE Freighter skill--I wish all three (Rorqual, Bowhead, my proposed ORE Freighter) all took the Capital Industrial ships skill. Then again, that skill requires mining barge V.

Maybe this ship I'm proposing should just use the ORE Freighter skill.

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."
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-12-01 19:16:58 UTC
I believe the idea would be best handled by the creation of a T3 hauler, which you can fit in any number of ways. Heavier tank, less cargo; and vice versa. Slippery sucker (lots of stabs) or stand your ground (lots of dps). Rather than fix peoples' options, give them the flexibility that T3 offers the combat ships. I think it's about time.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-12-03 04:58:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
That doesn't handle the same problem. A T3 hauler would be great for the small hauling, but while a lot of freighter pilots would be happy to give up cargo space for something durable, they don't want to give up so much as to be using a subcap for hauling or they would already be doing that.

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."
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#11 - 2014-12-03 05:18:47 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
OR.......
We could just give freighters a real capital ship layout & fitting allowance. And stop automatically gimping all industrial ships.
If someone wants to use their Jump Freighter as a Smart Bomber with it's 6 high slots (as an example), why is this an issue?

By deliberately leaving Industrials gimped on slots and fittings we will always have these issues. If we give them a real fitting layout and allowance comparable to other ships of their size, then we actually create a much more interesting Meta when they are capable in their own right.


Love the idea, but, as we can see by the post regarding IS Boxer and command broadcasting across multiple clients, gankers are already sobbing into their glasses, and we can't pile too much more onto them right now. Actually giving hauler pilots truly meaningful fitting options just might cause mass ganker IRL suicide, and we wouldn't want to be guilty of that, would we?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#12 - 2014-12-03 05:30:00 UTC
Meyr wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
OR.......
We could just give freighters a real capital ship layout & fitting allowance. And stop automatically gimping all industrial ships.
If someone wants to use their Jump Freighter as a Smart Bomber with it's 6 high slots (as an example), why is this an issue?

By deliberately leaving Industrials gimped on slots and fittings we will always have these issues. If we give them a real fitting layout and allowance comparable to other ships of their size, then we actually create a much more interesting Meta when they are capable in their own right.


Love the idea, but, as we can see by the post regarding IS Boxer and command broadcasting across multiple clients, gankers are already sobbing into their glasses, and we can't pile too much more onto them right now. Actually giving hauler pilots truly meaningful fitting options just might cause mass ganker IRL suicide, and we wouldn't want to be guilty of that, would we?


Theres something like 5 people who use IS Boxer to gank freighters, none of them are losing any sleep over this change. You already have a huge number of options for transporting your cargo around, perhaps you should use them before you demand overpowered monstrosities.
Takashi Jin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-12-03 06:57:32 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Of course, people explain that we don't want to have giant cheap cargo ships that are also extremely durable and also allowed into highsec.
I'm not sure why this is even a thing. If we don't want cheap giant freighters for high sec we don't want them for null sec either. I'm sorry but the risk in high sec is still there even for the most durable ...unless you choose rnot to move anything valuable with it... then what would be the point of having it at all?
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-12-03 07:31:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Theres something like 5 people who use IS Boxer to gank freighters, none of them are losing any sleep over this change. You already have a huge number of options for transporting your cargo around, perhaps you should use them before you demand overpowered monstrosities.

A Goon being against the idea means it's a good one.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2014-12-03 07:41:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Takashi Jin wrote:
I'm not sure why this is even a thing. If we don't want cheap giant freighters for high sec we don't want them for null sec either. I'm sorry but the risk in high sec is still there even for the most durable ...unless you choose rnot to move anything valuable with it... then what would be the point of having it at all?

The more hit points it has, the more value it can move safely in highsec. Since people only have about 10-20 seconds to shoot a target, it is important to bring enough firepower to finish it off quickly. Freighters are too flimsy to even think about bringing into nullsec because even with a powerful and uncontested support fleet guarding the freighter, it can still get popped in a brief crossfire. Normal capital ships have far more hit points because they are designed to survive a brief engagement. If you want to destroy a capital ship, you had better bring a fleet capable of sustained heavy firepower along with enough support to keep anyone else off your back. You don't just gank a capital with a handful of tornadoes.

When I said ships with capital HP aren't wanted in highsec, I didn't mean that they wouldn't be valued; just the opposite, they would be ridiculously overpowered because of CONCORD. Most of us don't want ships like that to be allowed to fly in highsec at all.

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."
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#16 - 2014-12-03 07:55:41 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Since people only have about 10-20 seconds to shoot a target, ...


Unless they employ bumping to keep the target locked down and unable to escape while the next wave of attack is prepared.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-12-03 08:00:03 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Since people only have about 10-20 seconds to shoot a target, ...


Unless they employ bumping to keep the target locked down and unable to escape while the next wave of attack is prepared.

I was talking about highsec suicide ganks.

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."
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#18 - 2014-12-03 10:57:35 UTC
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Theres something like 5 people who use IS Boxer to gank freighters, none of them are losing any sleep over this change. You already have a huge number of options for transporting your cargo around, perhaps you should use them before you demand overpowered monstrosities.

A Goon being against the idea means it's a good one.


So I take it you also think that we should go back to the monopoly on tech moons, bring back 250 carriers worth of sentries assigned to one guy and the ability to grind out several trillion in isk from FW in a weekend.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#19 - 2014-12-03 11:02:06 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Theres something like 5 people who use IS Boxer to gank freighters, none of them are losing any sleep over this change. You already have a huge number of options for transporting your cargo around, perhaps you should use them before you demand overpowered monstrosities.

A Goon being against the idea means it's a good one.


So I take it you also think that we should go back to the monopoly on tech moons, bring back 250 carriers worth of sentries assigned to one guy and the ability to grind out several trillion in isk from FW in a weekend.

Baltech, I admire your ability as a contrarian to fall on the right side of enough issues to slap anyone who calls you on it in a knee-jerk way.

BTW, somewhere in goons is someone on each side of EVERY idea. Literally by this definition, everything is both a terrible idea and a good idea.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-12-03 11:07:36 UTC
There are a lot of Goons agreeing with ideas that are contrary to what most laypeople think is a good idea. This is no conspiracy, however, but merely evidence of the deficit of experience among the general majority. One key element to note is that several of Goonswarms' enemies who have a lot of EVE experience will tend to agree with Goons on these subjects.

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."
12Next page