These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

freighter fits

First post
Author
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#101 - 2012-11-20 14:50:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Please take a look at the following spreadsheet, it has some numbers on the percentages you are able to increase m3, on any ship, using 3 rig slots and a maximum calibration of 300. In that case the optimal rigs to fit are 3 Cargohold Optimisation I's, which increase base m3 with 34.2% taking stacking penalties into account.

If you add these rig slots to the current freighters they would become overpowered as they already have the optimal m3. So you have to reduce their base m3. Their new base m3 should be the number that added with 34.2% gives the current base m3.

http://goo.gl/4RFl3

The spreadsheet also contains some numbers on what percentage you are able to increase m3 using the 3 rig slots, as well as fitting two Expanded Cargohold II's. The percentage increase then is 56.5%. Take a look at what m3 the 'new' freighters will be able to reach then, which is also on the spreadsheet. Its only roughly over 1kk m3.

o/

Mag's
Azn Empire
#102 - 2012-11-20 17:21:01 UTC
You're obviously not reading anything we say, it's been explained to you many times. Either that or you're simply trolling, so I see no point in continuing with this useless nerf the freighter idea thread.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#103 - 2012-11-20 17:29:49 UTC
do freighters really need to go much faster anyways? u could use an orca if u want fast align times.

if a freighter was only to lose cargo capacity in exchange for gaining low slots, it could be fit for ridiculous tank.
if a freighter was only to lose ehp in exchange for gaining low slots it could be fit for ridiculous capacity.

the only logical way to add fitting options to a freighter is to nerf both ehp and capacity to a degree where only highly specialised fits could match either capacity only OR tank only. anything else would have to be an inbetweener job.

when all u want is a faster freighter it makes much more sense to ask for a smaller, faster and less tanked mini-freighter...

other threads have already covered this where in ppl argue mini-freighter vs. Orca

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Mag's
Azn Empire
#104 - 2012-11-20 17:33:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Daichi Yamaton, we've pointed this out to him time and time again. You, like us, are wasting your time. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#105 - 2012-11-20 18:20:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Hey Daichi thanks for replying,

The orca will only handle about 100k m3 at best, but then you would need expensive T2 rigs, Industrial Command Ships at 5 and expanded cargo holds which will remove a big portion of its buffer as well as reduce velocity. In most cases it simply wont cut it, and thats why its not labeled as a freighter.

The freighter how ever has no fitting options which makes it stand out from other ships with intended roles since even they have fitting options.

And like i said ships do not automatically become overpowered from being fittable, that will depend on the base attributes. I already demonstrated what kind of m3 people could achive if you fit the proposed layout for maximum m3. However getting the freighter to carry that will come at cost to its tanking abilities, which gives it balance. In other words you would be able choose between 1 million m3 cargo capacity, but much worse tank, or carry the standard 800-900k m3 with a standard tank.

Basically, even tho the freighter will have reduced stock m3 and stock hull hp to prevent people making overpowered fits, the new stock freighter would still be vastly superior to any other hauler available. But it will really start to shine once you begin fitting it

o/

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#106 - 2012-11-20 22:29:42 UTC
something i posted in another forum. it has speed, tank and over 100km3 capacity (which is no small amount) of whatever u want, but can haul a maximum of 570km3 including ore and ships.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
For the OP (and u paik if u want)

[Orca, Orca C2 - Hauler]
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II

Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I

Improved Cloaking Device II
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Cargohold Optimization II
Large Cargohold Optimization II
Large Ancillary Current Router I


Hobgoblin II x5
Vespa EC-600 x5

This orca can haul 87 784m3 + 40 000m3 (127 784m3) of whatever u want

-plus, if u so wish, u can carry 400km3 of assembled ships (just less than half a freighter)
-u can also carry 50km3 of ore if u want
-it comes with a BS sized mwd for quick align times
-warps almost as fast as a BS (2.7au/s)
-has 91.5k ehp
-comes with drones for whoring on KM's or jamming ppl trying to gank u
-has secret holds that cannot be scanned by others
-can cloak

AND

-can be used as a small mobile POS for corpies
-can boost friendly gangs (doesnt have to use mining gang boosts)
-can be used to swap from bait ships to combat ships (the basis of ninja pvp)
-can be used to support miners
-costs less isk than a freighter
-can be refit for 200k+ ehp fits
-can re fit for more space with another cargo rig (u would need a 5% grid implant to fit the mwd though)
-maybe the coolest looking hauler in the game


what i think u might be missing is that the current freighters already have their stats at optimum level. to go beyond them would be going to far. so no freighter should tank more than it does atm, and no freighter should be able to carry more than it does now. if we are going to go beyond 1million m3 capacity then capital ships will be hauled into high sec, and if we are going to start fitting damage controls to freighters they will have ridiculous tanks.

in order to prevent these from happening, any freighter with fitting options MUST have its base capacity lowered such that a MAXIMUM CAPACITY fit does not reach 1mil m3. Additionally, the same freighter must have its base EHP lowered such that a MAXIMUM TANK fit does not go beyond 200k ehp. To satisfy the former would not be too difficult, but the latter will require halfing the EHP just to balance the resist bonus of damage controls.

Thus, a maximum capacity fit (of less than 1mil m3) would have an EHP of around 100k ehp before armour and structure losses are counted for astro rigs and cargo expanders. This is the point that ppl are trying to tell u. That u would completely nerf the freighter, because u have crippled their tank to something like 60k ehp for a meager 1mil m3 (because anything more would be game breaking).

the moral is, never, ever, give freighters fitting options. they are absolutely f*ing perfect as they are. u honestly could not get them any better.

if u want a faster freighter then use an orca or go +1 the mini-freighter thread

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#107 - 2012-11-20 22:54:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Please stop pulling numbers out of your asses, i have done the math, and the freighter with the layout suggested will not become underpowered or overpowered in EHP nor M3 capacity

Its not the freighters fault that capitals cant exist in highsec and freighter pilots should not be punished for this. Instead capitals should be unable to be assembled in high-sec or they should just have their volume increased.

With the layout suggested, the only way people can reach about 1kk m3 is by having a high freighter skill, fitting cargohold optimisation rigs, and expanded cargholds. This means their tank will suck. So it doesent matter

o/

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#108 - 2012-11-20 23:10:04 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
So basically you want to be able to min/max the freighter without having to make too serious of compromises and then modify other ships to make your idea work?

No other ship gets that kind of consideration. Not even combat ships. You're asking for far too much.

edit:
Souisa wrote:
Please stop pulling numbers out of your asses, i have done the math, and the freighter with the layout suggested will not become underpowered or overpowered in EHP nor M3 capacity

Your numbers are flawed. You're assuming that people will create "balanced" fits when history shows that people will min/max certain stats to their absolute maximum.

Always assume that people will fit for either maximum cargo or maximum EHP or maximum agility... then go from there. There is no inbetween on this.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#109 - 2012-11-20 23:12:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
It will be a pretty serious compromise to have 1kk m3, but no buffer

ShahFluffers wrote:

Souisa wrote:
Please stop pulling numbers out of your asses, i have done the math, and the freighter with the layout suggested will not become underpowered or overpowered in EHP nor M3 capacity

Your numbers are flawed. You're assuming that people will create "balanced" fits when history shows that people will min/max certain stats to their absolute maximum.

Always assume that people will fit for either maximum cargo or maximum EHP or maximum agility... then go from there. There is no inbetween on this.



My numbers are flawed.. then you completely ignore them and say i havent taken into account that people will min/max

o/

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#110 - 2012-11-20 23:20:59 UTC
Souisa wrote:
It will be a pretty serious compromise to have 1kk m3, but no buffer

True freighter pilots don't rely on their buffer to survive a gank. The avoid ganks in the first place by using all the tricks that PvP pilots use.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#111 - 2012-11-20 23:21:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Do you even realise what you are saying..

o/

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#112 - 2012-11-20 23:41:59 UTC
Souisa wrote:


With the layout suggested, the only way people can reach about 1kk m3 is by having a high freighter skill, fitting cargohold optimisation rigs, and expanded cargholds. This means their tank will suck. So it doesent matter


and u dnt think they would? cause i would deliberately do it to ferry dreads to high sec. my lack of buffer is irrelevant when there are no bad guys to oppose me or i have an escort. and as for making caps non-unpackable in high sec, u'd be asking CCP to add extra mechanics to the game, that may even result in bugs, just for ur faster freighter? it would be far simpler to just go for a mini-freighter or an Orca.

But the real problem is u either have to cripple my tank to move 1mil m3 (when i can move 980k m3 already) or u have to let me fit a ridiculous 300k ehp tank when i tank fit. the former is a nerf or the latter is a ridiculously tough hauler. the 160k ehp of the obelisk is enough...

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#113 - 2012-11-20 23:56:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Its not just about a customizable freighter, its about EVE's core mechanics of fittable ships. Dont you see? :)

And why do you even like the static freighter design when you say you dont need the buffer

o/

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#114 - 2012-11-21 00:14:11 UTC
its that i can have the buffer AND a 980km3 hold at the moment, allowing me to afk haul large amounts of gear and/or ships. what ur asking would either allow me to haul caps into high sec (which would be well worth the loss in tank and break the game) or ur saying that i can only haul 20km3 more than i already can, but with half the tank, which makes me a much more vulnerable target when hauling in high sec.

another alternative is being able to haul some 500-600km3 of gear with a 300k ehp tank. its not invincible, but its a massive boost to afk hauling when u dont really need one. u'd have pirates dying to gate guns before they can bring down the freighters.

i'm of the opinion that u should not be able to blindly afk haul assets worth countless billions without the risk of being ganked. but such fitting options would make this a possibility.

this will not be worth it, because it doesn't work.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#115 - 2012-11-21 00:26:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
Kinda covered the part where you said you would be able to haul capitals into high-sec

The rest you seem to have misunderstood.

Basically the freighter will have cargo capacity and structural hitpoints reduced. Then they get 2 low slots and 3 rig slots. The rig slots can be used to take the m3 back to the current level, and the low slots can be used to take the EHP back to the current level. However its the tanky part that gets especially complicated, but with the right base attributes and with enough experimentation you will end up with a perfectly balanced fittable freighter.

o/

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#116 - 2012-11-21 00:41:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
why should they have to change the volume of caps for ur idea?

and u've just said it urself, with ur idea we would have to chose between either the same cargo capacity as now, or the same tank as now. when right now we have BOTH.

why do u want to nerf freighters and what purpose does it serve?

edit-

if the rigs allow u to get back to 980m3, then fitting 2x cargo expanders will buff that to almost 1.6mil m3. u dnt see the problem with that?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Souisa
Subhypersonics
#117 - 2012-11-21 02:35:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
They dont have to do anything :)

When you only have to use the rigs to get the optimal m3, and you only have to use the lows to get the buffer, does that mean you can only have one or the other?

After using 3 cargohold optimisation rigs you will not be able to get 1.6kk m3 with 2 expanded cargo holds due to stacking penalties :)

o/

J'Poll
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#118 - 2012-11-21 09:32:19 UTC
Souisa wrote:

For example, an (empty) freighter dont need 200K EHP


Goons, TEST and others in Uedama and Niarja proof otherwise...Twisted

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#119 - 2012-11-21 10:12:49 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Souisa wrote:
When you only have to use the rigs to get the optimal m3, and you only have to use the lows to get the buffer, does that mean you can only have one or the other?

See... there is where you are running into a wall.

People WILL only fit either max tank or max cargohold if it is in their interest to do so. And you MUST take this into account when you balance anything. That's why the current freighter would effectively need to be gutted to make your idea work... so people would not be able to go above and beyond what the current freighter does in any one aspect.

This is why people see you idea as a nerf. If you can't see this then you are blind.

Souisa wrote:
After using 3 cargohold optimisation rigs you will not be able to get 1.6kk m3 with 2 expanded cargo holds due to stacking penalties :)

Expanded Cargoholds don't have stacking penalties. Neither do cargo rigs.
Souisa
Subhypersonics
#120 - 2012-11-21 13:34:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
ShahFluffers wrote:
Souisa wrote:
When you only have to use the rigs to get the optimal m3, and you only have to use the lows to get the buffer, does that mean you can only have one or the other?

See... there is where you are running into a wall.

People WILL only fit either max tank or max cargohold if it is in their interest to do so. And you MUST take this into account when you balance anything. That's why the current freighter would effectively need to be gutted to make your idea work... so people would not be able to go above and beyond what the current freighter does in any one aspect.

This is why people see you idea as a nerf. If you can't see this then you are blind.

Souisa wrote:
After using 3 cargohold optimisation rigs you will not be able to get 1.6kk m3 with 2 expanded cargo holds due to stacking penalties :)

Expanded Cargoholds don't have stacking penalties. Neither do cargo rigs.


Ok so what is the maximum m3 people will be able to reach?

And what is the maximum ehp? and if they max m3 what will the ehp be? and if they max ehp what will the m3 be?

And if expanded cargoholds dont have stacking penalties, how come when you fit a ship with 3 cargohold optimisation rigs, and 2 expanded cargohold II's the total increase in m3 will only be 59.5%?

Do the math or gtfo tbh

o/