Player Features and Ideas Discussion

If this happens, CAT 1 wormholes will change. At the moment no battleship can travel through a wormhole into a CAT 1 system. Not even when packaged in a cargohold, because there is no ship small enough with a hold big enough.

I guess this was to protect new players in low class wormholes. It doesn't of course, because they can still be ganked by tech 3 ships, battlecruisers, cruisers and bombers.

Yeah, the more I think about it, I think it was to protect the sleepers...

How about making Industrials that are cargo-fit actually able to survive a gank by a solo frigate?

You've taken away damned near ALL of the risk for gankers, with Tier 3 BC's, Tags For Sec-Status, Cargo Scanners, and massive DPS from destroyers. How about you show you actually give a damn about those who produce those items?

I'm not asking for an Orca-calibre tank on an Iteron V, but is 25-35,000 too much, compared to the value of the cargo they can carry, even if it's only Veldspar?

You like to brag about how you're working to balance Risk vs. Reward, but what you're doing with Industrials and gankers just gone to show how that is only so much lip-service - to the gankers.

Try taking away cargo scanners, if you simply cannot bear the thought of making a cargo-fit Industrial a bit tougher. How about you actually bring SOME 'risk' to ganking.

Then the rest of us can enjoy ganker tears by flying empty Industrials through Udaema, and the other popular systems.

Stop catering to the biggest bunch of whiners in the game, the gankers, and make them actually accept some risk.

Take the Iteron V - the proposed change for this ship is ENTIRELY negative.

Less armor, less hull (for a Gallente hull? Really?), less cargo, same PG.

Similar modifications for all of the 'cargo' versions. This patch will make an entire category of already ridiculously fragile ships even easier to kill.

It makes these hulls absolutely useless, and nothing more than 'Loot-Piñatas' for gankers.

Giving them the EHP of the weakest cruiser hull is only sensible. Make the 'tanky' haulers TOUGH! Giving THEM cruiser-class EHP is still a joke. They're already slow, align like my Dominix, and will still die to 2-3 T1-fit Catalysts, meaning that it's still stupidly easy and economical to kill.

Ignorance of the true purpose of a non-PVP hull leads to shoddy thinking. The toughness of the hull should be in-line with its intended mission. A scanning Cov-Ops frigate can be as fragile as you want to make it, because, unless I make a mistake, it should never be shot at. An Industrial hauler, particularly the 'cargo version', will absolutely expect to be a target, but you've given it even less survivability than it previously had.

An Iteron V, cargo-fit, should be able to tank enough firepower in its mid-slots to successfully haul a cargo of Hi-sec ore (not minerals, just ORE) if it encounters the level of firepower that its dropped cargo can pay for. Anything less, and you're simply kissing the asses of the gankers at the expense of the haulers/industrialists.

As it stands, the proposed change to the Iteron V will allow it to be killed by two frigates if it is cargo-fit.

About the Iteron V, i propose a specialized bay for packed ships and reduce sighly the normal bay.
I suggest a packaged volume up to 50K (one BS) for this new bay.

So, the Iteron V is keeping the biggest cargo rank but in specialized way.

For special big hauler (45K max with rigs and cargohold ?), i suggest an ORE Hauler with level V skill requirement.

I think like every other part of eve, there are tradeoffs to be done with industrials.

If you want to transport 35,000m3 of goods in one then all the mods you fit are going to be cargohold mods, leaving little powergrid for good shield defences.

However if you're willing to accept a smaller cargohold then you can start getting stronger shield extenders and boosters on there with the help of a few fitting mods.

For transporting low-value high-volume ore, weak defences are nor normally a problem. If you want to transport high value (usually smaller) items then a refit is probably on the cards.

If the iteron V isn't capable of achieving the buffer/tank you need, then the new nyrios (is that how you spell it?) could be a candidate.

Are any of these changes a stealth nerf to high sec solo suicide ganking if so which ones? Or are hauler tanks being kept at sensible levels unlike current barge battleship levels?

30 mill in gank ships v 100m cargo. You just made every one else's point.

When do the loot gods EVER drop 100% (or even 50% for that matter) of the loot in a ship?

I'll make it nice and easy for you..... NEVER.



From what I can tell, 30ish% is a good guesstimate of drop rate on average, although not necessarily 30% of value.

In case you don't get it, 30% of 100m is OH LOOK 30m - the cost of the ships you said would be needed to gank said hauler. Unless their entire reason to play is ganking (and I bet you profit is their main reason) then they won't be ganking your ship once they figure out it's not a profitable option.

If you want to take the risk and move higher value cargo, use one of the ships mentioned earlier in the thread.

Make that "Even more easily ganked loot piñatas."

Besides, hisec ganking could use a bit of a nerf. CCP already gave you Tier 3 BC's, Tags for Sec Status, and allows ganking from NPC corporations, where you're immune to a war dec.

What else do you want, haulers to simply self-destruct their ships for you? How about accepting some actual RISK for your reward?

How about I make it easy for you, instead...

Why do you regard a hauler as the only class of ship that you cannot use to its full potential? Why should a pilot need to limit their fit, gimp it, in effect?

The purpose of an Industrial is to relocate items. There is absolutely no item in Eve that, when an Iteron V is filled with it, will not pay several times over for the firepower needed to kill the hauler. You can't find an item that inexpensive. Period. By definition, your argument calls for not utilizing a 'cargo-class' Industrial to its full potential.

What, then, is the purpose of these vessels? If it's not cargo capacity, then, what? Their currently laughably thin tank is being further reduced, so don't even start to suggest that they should be fit with tanking modules. They simply are absolutely incapable of doing anything better than another ship in the Industrial category.

Q.E.D., they are USELESS. What is the point of spending your ISK on a ship that is supposed to move items from Point A to Point B, but cannot be filled to capacity without putting a price on your head, cannot be fitted with a rudimentary tank, even at the price of no expanded cargo capacity, that will survive a single Catalyst in a 0.5 system, cannot utilize speed as a defense instead of shields/armor/hull, cannot fight back with enough force to frighten anything more dangerous than a shuttle, and has no other, secondary purpose, unless you count padding ganker's killboards as a purpose.

Weak haulers should be able to tank like the proposed 'tanky' Industrials, and the 'tanky' ones should be able to mount a defense that will enable them to call for help. Decrease their cargo capacity, but make them able to survive long enough for friends in-system to arrive on-scene, if they get jumped by 2-3 Catalysts. Make it about "fights" with these ships, make them actually capable of fulfilling their potential, not incapable of doing anything better than any other hauler, except die in a fire.

Every ship has, needs, a purpose, something that it does, and does well, but the 'cargo' Industrials have absolutely nothing to encourage someone to purchase them. You can't even use them as an inexpensive bait ship, because a cargo-scanner will show them to be empty, or only partially loaded.

You can use every other ship in Eve to the utmost of its and your capacity to do the job it was designed for, or a different job you created for it. Why not these?