These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP No longer adding sandbox?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#141 - 2012-11-13 15:17:49 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Basically its not being nerfed, its not even being buffed, its just becomming a ship that players can better utilize


Except people won't utilise it better as it already performs it's role as a large scale hauler perfectly. You can try & make it sound however you want, but we all know that this subject is only being brought up because people are losing freighters in highsec. You want to be able to fit a larger tank on them which ultimately won't do a thing against freighter ganking because freighter pilots make themselves profitable targets regardless.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#142 - 2012-11-13 15:19:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Basically its not being nerfed, its not even being buffed, its just becomming a ship that players can better utilize


Except people won't utilise it better as it already performs it's role as a large scale hauler perfectly. You can try & make it sound however you want, but we all know that this subject is only being brought up because people are losing freighters in highsec. You want to be able to fit a larger tank on them which ultimately won't do a thing against freighter ganking because freighter pilots make themselves profitable targets regardless.


I think i have been pretty clear in why i bring up this topic :)

o/
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#143 - 2012-11-13 16:03:58 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Souisa wrote:


What makes you think it will become worse of?


The fact that I would have to do two trips for every one I do now no matter how I fit it.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#144 - 2012-11-13 16:17:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
baltec1 wrote:
Souisa wrote:


What makes you think it will become worse of?


The fact that I would have to do two trips for every one I do now no matter how I fit it.


Well like i said, you fit 3 cargohold optmimization rigs and you will be able to transport about the same as you would now

o/
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#145 - 2012-11-13 16:19:19 UTC
Souisa wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Souisa wrote:


What makes you think it will become worse of?


The fact that I would have to do two trips for every one I do now no matter how I fit it.


Well like i said, you fit 3 cargohold optmimization rigs and you will be able to transport about the same as you would now


Therefore making the change entirely pointless as people would do this anyway. What possible other uses for a giant cargohold with an engine attached can you possibly think of?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#146 - 2012-11-13 16:20:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Souisa wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Souisa wrote:


What makes you think it will become worse of?


The fact that I would have to do two trips for every one I do now no matter how I fit it.


Well like i said, you fit 3 cargohold optmimization rigs and you will be able to transport about the same as you would now


Therefore making the change entirely pointless as people would do this anyway. What possible other uses for a giant cargohold with an engine attached can you possibly think of?


He was saying that he wouldnt be able to transport the same amount of m3 as he use to. I have no idea why he says this. Its a non issue since the freighter should have the same m3 with 3 cargohold optimisiations. That will take it back to its current status, except it needs a little buffer. This is done with a DCU or Reinforced bulkheads or both. However there are other situations where niether buffer nor 860k M3 is needed where speed is preferred instead. Go ahead and fit whatever speed mods you like then.

o/
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#147 - 2012-11-13 17:06:13 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Souisa wrote:


He was saying that he wouldnt be able to transport the same amount of m3 as he use to. I have no idea why he says this. Its a non issue since the freighter should have the same m3 with 3 cargohold optimisiations. That will take it back to its current status, except it needs a little buffer. This is done with a DCU or Reinforced bulkheads or both. However there are other situations where niether buffer nor 860k M3 is needed where speed is preferred instead. Go ahead and fit whatever speed mods you like then.


In order to have my current cargo all of those slots would have to be filled with cargo expanders because the base cargo would have been nerfed. This means my tank is now massivly reduced so I cannot carry as much of my cargo in one trip.

No matter how you do this freighters will be much worse off.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#148 - 2012-11-13 17:11:02 UTC
Well feel free to do that, general rule of thumb has always been maximum 1 billion worth of cargo else you make yourself a target :)

o/
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#149 - 2012-11-13 17:14:42 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Well feel free to do that, general rule of thumb has always been maximum 1 billion worth of cargo else you make yourself a target :)


Only with your idea it would be around 750 to 800 mil if we want to transport as much as we do now. Where exactly is the benefit in this for freighter pilots?
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#150 - 2012-11-13 17:15:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Well feel free to do that, general rule of thumb has always been maximum 1 billion worth of cargo else you make yourself a target :)


Only with your idea it would be around 750 to 800 mil if we want to transport as much as we do now. Where exactly is the benefit in this for freighter pilots?


The versatility, i feel like ive covered this, as well as you can make your freighter excactly as it is today

o/
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#151 - 2012-11-13 17:18:10 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Souisa wrote:


The versatility, i feel like ive covered this, as well as you can make your freighter excactly as it is today


A worse ship is not adding versatility and no, you could not make it exactly the same as today. We already have a choice of 29 ships.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#152 - 2012-11-13 17:23:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Souisa wrote:
The versatility, i feel like ive covered this, as well as you can make your freighter excactly as it is today
No, you can't do the same things. This is the thing you keep ignoring.

You can do less. This means versatility is reduced. This reduction is inevitable due to the balancing constraints that would have to be adhered to. You are suggesting a massive nerf of an entire line of ships for no reason. Why does this nerf need to happen (and no, versatility does not answer that question since versatility = nerf — you'd only be begging the question and not provide a proper answer). Try hard to think of a reason why you want freighters to be nerfed, please, and explain it.

Quote:
What makes you think it will become worse of?
Because it inherently must be due to the balancing constraints. You must lose cargo space. If you try to make up for it, you must lose tank in the process. The current mix gives you the best cargo capacity possible while still retaining a good tank. You are trying to argue that being able to choose between half and apple and a pear, and half a pear and an apple is somehow better than having a whole apple and a whole pair. It is absolute nonsense.

It's not something I think. It's something I know for a fact because I understand how the game works. You do not.

Quote:
The freighter doesent really do any of those well
Yes it can. Moreover, if you don't like it, guess what? You already have a fuckton of options available to you, and none of them require a massive nerf to freighters to work. You want to ruin a ship class in order to get something that already exists in the game. Explain why this should happen.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#153 - 2012-11-13 17:24:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Souisa wrote:


The versatility, i feel like ive covered this, as well as you can make your freighter excactly as it is today


A worse ship is not adding versatility and no, you could not make it exactly the same as today. We already have a choice of 29 ships.


How is it going to be worse?

o/
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#154 - 2012-11-13 17:26:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Souisa wrote:
How is it going to be worse?
This has been explained to you on every single page of this thread.
Reported for trolling.
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#155 - 2012-11-13 17:31:36 UTC
This thread has gone around in enough circles that it has lost its value. Locking it now.

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents