Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'm not against pirates, gank, and certainly not against pvp. I'm just against high sec pirates, I think they are lame.They just spam alt factories so they can gank in high sec forever like if there was no reprimand for doing it... it's broken.

as for the idea... I agree it's a little drastic.. we should make only hauling class ships impossible to target near hi sec gates. ^^

I've been playing this game for four years, and routinely freight stuff around highsec. I have NEVER lost an indy nor a freighter due to highsec ganks, and I make regular trips down the trade hub routes. It is EASY to not get ganked.... I've also mined in a hulk (before the changes), and NEVER lost it despite multiple suicide gank attempts. I've had plenty of can thieves and ninja salvagers mess with me when mission running, yet have NEVER lost a ship do to them....

The reason I've had so much success in keeping my stuff safe, is not because CCP flips some magical switch that makes me immune to "bad guys". It's because I pay attention to how I fit my ship, I pay attention to the game mechanics, I pay attention to how much crap I put in a cargo bay, and I take my time and do things carefully and intelligently.

Your idea is completely bad... it is nothing more than a cry for mommy's protection: "I can't handle highsec gankers, CCP make me safe" !! This is inappropriate for EvE, and most players despise that attitude...

The proposal, to allow fitting options on freighters is a decent idea to give players a choice on how they fit their ships. It puts the choice in the players hands, so idiots that do stupid things will continue to die, but people that are smart and cautious will continue to excel. Can you understand why the OPs proposal has merit, but yours is considered complete crap? Do you understand the difference, that one is about enabling players, and yours is about disabling players?

And a note: People are ganking freighters with t2 fit tier 3 BC's. Those aren't 1-week dessie alts used to gank hulks. It takes THREE MONTHS to train into those ships & T2 weapons, and it takes 3 weeks to train the t1 versions. Players don't just roll these characters (which is an exploit) when their Sec Status drops. They deal with the sec hits, just like they deal with the half a billion in ship losses incurred every time they perform a gank operation. They are playing the game, where it's worth the time to organize, the loss of ships, the loss of sec status, and the danger from killrights to gank freighters.... and the reason it's worth their time and energy has EVERYTHING to do wtih what that freighter pilot puts in his cargo bay!

Iol it's not a cry for mommy's protection, I'm merely proposing that high security space be secure.Why does that revolt people like you so much? you're like " oh I've hauled and mined for 4 years never lost anything I'm so brilliant" yeah whatever man, you must be way better than all those people who lost their cargoes in their noob days.

You know There are new players who are going to lose much of their hard earned assets in one of those under-tanked ultra vulnerable haulers because they don't even know that people can gank them in high sec.

And if CCP is not going to change anything to the situation ( which is completely fine with me btw) they could at least specify to new players that high sec is a dangerous place filled with gate camps and high standing pirates that will blow you up at the first sign of valuable cargo. Or is that too much "hand holding" too?

and yes I understand that my proposal is about disabling people, it's exactly the goal, it's exactly why I like it.I could make hundreds of analogies with our world,the ultimate sandbox, to prove my point.

Oh ok,it must be because I am Canadian. ^^ We have a more "care bear" approach to problems.

I love the line about terrible things you can do "donating to the tea party".

Please ask your government to make that illegal.

Just to be quite clear i'm Canadian and i'm not a care bear. Lets keep this thread on the topic of allowing people choice. Honestly the day CCP makes it so you just can't lock certain types of ships is the day I unsubscribe and a lot of people with me. Then this game will go belly up really quick.

Back to Gizznitt's on topic comments, I have to agree that certain types of fits could make freighters op and ccp would need to be careful if they implemented this idea. Mostly though I would just like to see people tank freighter for higher value cargo runs, or nano them if they are moving small amounts of low value stuff, or do a max cargo version and die in a fire to gankers.

Choice is the key to life in this game both good and bad.

Also, on the carrying capitals front. From my original idea I was saying this change shouldn't increase what freighters can haul it should simply make it so that they can lower their hauling amount and trade it for higher tank than a freighter currently allows. Ideally the freighters hauling capacity should not change if fitted for max cargo.

What are all you people complaining about the "1.000.000m3 can't be over reached! This will bring Caps to highsec OHNOES!"

Rubbish, if CCP decide to enlarge the cargoholds past 1.000.000m3 they'll simply increase the packaged size of the caps that have a risk of fitting in there... You really think they'd not adjust it?

Would there really be a point in fitting a cloak to a freighter in high sec?

I can decloak a frigate with a drake if we see it come through the gate I'm sure I can get a freighter.

However it would make an interesting nullsec combination:

Freighter + Carrier = ships can refit to absolutely anything on the fly. + mobile ammo dump.

CCP made it clear they don't want anymore new capitals(carriers and dreads) in highsec. So something will have to be done to prevent freighters from reaching 1 million cargohold ( A packed carrier/dread, is 1 million).