These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

freighter fits

First post
Author
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#1 - 2012-11-14 11:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Hello,

I dont think the current freighter does its job very good. Its either slower than neccesary, undertanked, or with a cargo bay much larger than needed.

For example, when flying empty some people dont need 200K EHP and 800K m3 cargo space. Some would prefer speed instead. When hauling smaller quantities with alot of value some would prefer tank over m3. When hauling large quantities with little value some would prefer m3 over tank etc.

With fitting options this could change and we would be able to better utilize the freighter for these different kinds of situations

The basic idea is to lower the default size of the cargo bay, as well as the structual hitpoints. Then via rigs and low slots have people build a freighter with similar stats as the current one if they want.

With 3 rig slots and a calibration of 300 you will never be able to get more than about 52% increase in cargo capacity from rigs according to my calculations. The rigs will probably be most used to increase m3, since they only penalize armor. The freighters buffer tank lies in the structure. So people will prefer Cargohold Optimisation Rigs over Expanded Cargoholds, since Expanded Cargoholds significantly impact structural hitpoints and thus their buffer.

Some have said that freighters cant have over 1 million m3, because that would allow for capitals to enter high-sec. However i dont believe this is the freighters fault. Instead of punishing it to fix this problem, the capital themselves should be 'punished' or nerfed or what have you. Basically in order to have a capital ship take up only 1.000.000 m3, it has to be repacked. If they can be kept repacked when in high-sec im not sure what harm they can do. Depending on what impact this could have on the game -Your thoughts please? - a solution could be to remove the ability to assemble them in high-sec. Then you would be free of the 1kk m3 mark, and dont have to worry about players exceeding this on a freighter.

The mark will definately be exceeded by some if fitting freighters is going to work properly, not because the goal is to be able to have 1kk m3 cargoholds, but because low-slots are needed for the tank, and have to exist. However trying to push the freighter to 1kk m3 will come at cost to the tank. On top of the 3 Cargohold Optmisiation Rigs you would need 1 or 2 Expanded Cargoholds which significantly reduces structural hitpoints, and the structural hitpoints are the freighters main buffer. By fitting Expanded Cargoholds not only are you reducing the buffer you are also not fitting a DCU or Reinforced Bulkheads which was suppose to bring it back to the 200k EHP mark, as it has today. In other words the freighter might be able to carry 1kk m3 but it will be easier to gank. The benefit is that players will be able to give and take depending on the circumstances, and if they fit wrong or get surprised, they might end up being ganked. It will also allow players to more effectively complete logistics tasks, which i know some people dread the thought of. However, there is no reason haulers and industrialsts should not be able to optimise and specialise their ships when PVP'ers etc. can.

o/

Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#2 - 2012-11-14 11:39:10 UTC
Freighters are not meant to be flexible, and their slow alignment time is very intentional.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#3 - 2012-11-14 11:39:32 UTC
Why not ?

o/

J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2012-11-14 11:45:24 UTC
Since when can you fit freighters .. or is this vaporware?
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Shamefuldirty
PERMIT REGULATORS
#5 - 2012-11-14 11:46:16 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Why not ?


Indeeed why not! Why can't you have at least some flexibility in how you want your frieghter to perfom. By all means have it still align slow compared to other ships standards. But why can't I have more buffer if I feel I need it in exchange for less cargo space? Why not?

Sausages anyone??

CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#6 - 2012-11-14 11:46:40 UTC
Moving to Features & Ideas.

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

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#7 - 2012-11-14 11:48:27 UTC
J3ssica Alba wrote:
Since when can you fit freighters .. or is this vaporware?


This is just a discussion on the freighter, why or why not it should have fits

o/

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#8 - 2012-11-14 11:48:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Thanks Eterne.

o/

Spurty
#9 - 2012-11-14 11:51:10 UTC
Souisa wrote:
Why not ?


Fear, uncertainty and doubt

Honestly, now we know what it takes to pop one in highsec, it's clear to me that fears have been misplaced

Could see allowing nano fibers or inertia stabs being fine

Wouldn't want to see one with 7 bulk reinforcers and a damage control though lol

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#10 - 2012-11-14 11:53:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Spurty wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Why not ?


Fear, uncertainty and doubt

Honestly, now we know what it takes to pop one in highsec, it's clear to me that fears have been misplaced

Could see allowing nano fibers or inertia stabs being fine

Wouldn't want to see one with 7 bulk reinforcers and a damage control though lol


Actually the fit layout was inspired by the Orca. It has two low slots and its nice being able to choose between 2 istabs, 2 expanded cargoholds or reinforced bulkheads+DCU . Each fit has their advantage and disadvantage without being either too powerful or useless. So i think 2 low slots on the freighter should be sufficient

o/

Chaotic Mind
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2012-11-14 12:52:37 UTC
They could add T3 Freighters still without any slots or rigs, but like that it would be easy to refit them

like that you could configure your Freighter for Cargo, speed or durability (no cloaking)
Liu Ellens
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2012-11-14 13:21:43 UTC
I'm for the T3 idea. Including crazy options like Jump Drive, Covert-Ops Jump Drive, Can Enter HighSec; Cloaking Device, Non-Scannable Cargohold, huge capacitor (for two, three jumps in a row) and so forth.
All with their pros and cons...

(Yes, including the loss of a skill upon fail.)

Well, they oughta know what to do with them hogs out there for shure.

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#13 - 2012-11-14 13:30:49 UTC
I would give freighters 1 low slot, and not enough CPU for a dcu.
Dave stark
#14 - 2012-11-14 14:17:53 UTC
inb4

"omg ganking is too easy now, why did ccp make it easier for gankers?"
"how so?"
"my freighter was popped by 1 tornado"
"did you fill your low slots with nanofibers?"
"ofc i did!"
Kimo Khan
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2012-11-14 16:19:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Kimo Khan
Souisa wrote:
Hello,

The last freighter thread got closed because it ran around in circles. It was basically a guy saying no and a guy saying yes without any constructive content. But i am making a new thread now, in order to hopefully get to the bottom of this. :)

Basically the current freighter doesnt do its job very good. Its either slower than neccesary, overtanked, or with a cargo bay much larger than needed.

For example, an empty freighter dont need 200K EHP, it doesent need 800K m3 cargo space. Some would prefer speed in this case instead. Some situations you need to haul about 400k 1 jump, and would prefer speed over cargo capacity or tank. So on so forth.

Some have said that freighters cant have over 1 million m3, because that would allow for capitals to enter high-sec. However i dont believe this is the freighters fault. Instead of punishing it to fix this problem, the capital themselves should be 'punished' or nerfed or what have you. Basically in order to have a capital ship take up only 1.000.000 m3, it has to be repacked. If they can be kept repacked when in high-sec im not sure what harm they can do. Depending on what impact this could have on the game -Your thoughts please? - a solution could be to remove the ability to assemble them in high-sec. Then you would be free of the 1kk m3 mark, and dont have to worry about players exceeding this on a freighter.

The mark will definately be exceeded by some pilots if fitting freighters is going to work properly, not because the goal is to be able to have 1kk m3 cargoholds, but because low-slots are needed for the tank, and have to exist. However trying to push the freighter to 1kk m3 will come at cost to the tank. On top of the 3 Cargohold Optmisiation Rigs you would need 1 or 2 Expanded Cargoholds which significantly reduces structural hitpoints, and the structural hitpoints are the freighters main buffer. By fitting Expanded Cargoholds not only are you reducing the buffer you are also not fitting a DCU or Reinforced Bulkheads which was suppose to bring it back to the 200k EHP mark, as it has today. In other words the freighter might be able to carry 1kk m3 but it will be easier to gank. The benefit is that players will be able to give and take depending in the circumstances, and if they fit wrong or get surprised, they might end up being ganked. It will also allow players to more effectively complete logistics tasks, which i know some people dread the thought of. However, there is no reason haulers and industrialsts should not be able to optimise and specialise their ships when PVP'ers etc. can.


You contradict yourself in the above. You say they don't need 800km3 space then you explain why they should be able to get over 1000m3 space. (Highlighted above)

You say they are over tanked, then you explain how to make them tankier.

Don't change freighters, instead introduce a new transport with more cargo space rather than warp core stab or cloak.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#16 - 2012-11-14 16:34:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Kimo Khan wrote:
Souisa wrote:
Hello,

The last freighter thread got closed because it ran around in circles. It was basically a guy saying no and a guy saying yes without any constructive content. But i am making a new thread now, in order to hopefully get to the bottom of this. :)

Basically the current freighter doesnt do its job very good. Its either slower than neccesary, overtanked, or with a cargo bay much larger than needed.

For example, an empty freighter dont need 200K EHP, it doesent need 800K m3 cargo space. Some would prefer speed in this case instead. Some situations you need to haul about 400k 1 jump, and would prefer speed over cargo capacity or tank. So on so forth.

Some have said that freighters cant have over 1 million m3, because that would allow for capitals to enter high-sec. However i dont believe this is the freighters fault. Instead of punishing it to fix this problem, the capital themselves should be 'punished' or nerfed or what have you. Basically in order to have a capital ship take up only 1.000.000 m3, it has to be repacked. If they can be kept repacked when in high-sec im not sure what harm they can do. Depending on what impact this could have on the game -Your thoughts please? - a solution could be to remove the ability to assemble them in high-sec. Then you would be free of the 1kk m3 mark, and dont have to worry about players exceeding this on a freighter.

The mark will definately be exceeded by some pilots if fitting freighters is going to work properly, not because the goal is to be able to have 1kk m3 cargoholds, but because low-slots are needed for the tank, and have to exist. However trying to push the freighter to 1kk m3 will come at cost to the tank. On top of the 3 Cargohold Optmisiation Rigs you would need 1 or 2 Expanded Cargoholds which significantly reduces structural hitpoints, and the structural hitpoints are the freighters main buffer. By fitting Expanded Cargoholds not only are you reducing the buffer you are also not fitting a DCU or Reinforced Bulkheads which was suppose to bring it back to the 200k EHP mark, as it has today. In other words the freighter might be able to carry 1kk m3 but it will be easier to gank. The benefit is that players will be able to give and take depending in the circumstances, and if they fit wrong or get surprised, they might end up being ganked. It will also allow players to more effectively complete logistics tasks, which i know some people dread the thought of. However, there is no reason haulers and industrialsts should not be able to optimise and specialise their ships when PVP'ers etc. can.


You contradict yourself in the above. You say they don't need 800km3 space then you explain why they should be able to get over 1000m3 space. (Highlighted above)

You say they are over tanked, then you explain how to make them tankier.

Don't change freighters, instead introduce a new transport with more cargo space rather than warp core stab or cloak.


EVE Online already has a myriad of ships. What you probably didnt understand is that there are almost infinite situations a hauler can be in, and the current freighter will be more or less equally bad in them all

o/

Kimo Khan
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2012-11-14 16:43:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Kimo Khan
Souisa wrote:


EVE Online already has a myriad of ships. What you probably didnt understand is that there are almost infinite situations a hauler can be in, and the current freighter will do be more or less equally bad in them all


I disagree with that comment. I use my freighter quite often with no issues. I am perfectly happy with freighter as it is for the purpose it serves. I will agree that a new class is needed somewhere between Freighter and Industrial. Perhaps a Tier 2 Quick Freighter. (see next persons comment)
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#18 - 2012-11-14 18:58:06 UTC
As I've mentioned in the fifty nine ships dev blog, something like:

Drop capacity to 62% of current or so
Drop the number of structure points to 70% or so.
Increase base speed to 125% or so.
CPU 70
PG 2
2 low slots.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#19 - 2012-11-14 19:22:21 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Deleted some posts that were basically trolls.

Keep posts on topic and respectful, even if you disagree with someone.

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

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#20 - 2012-11-14 22:47:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Kimo Khan wrote:
Souisa wrote:


EVE Online already has a myriad of ships. What you probably didnt understand is that there are almost infinite situations a hauler can be in, and the current freighter will do be more or less equally bad in them all


I disagree with that comment. I use my freighter quite often with no issues. I am perfectly happy with freighter as it is for the purpose it serves. I will agree that a new class is needed somewhere between Freighter and Industrial. Perhaps a Tier 2 Quick Freighter. (see next persons comment)


There is a huge gap between the orca which at best can haul about 130k m3, and the freighters which haul about 800k m3 depending on skills. However i dont think there is a need to add another ship. The freighter could fill the gap

o/

123Next pageLast page