These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Freighters and Jump Freighters Rebalance [Updated]

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Maxdig
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#461 - 2014-05-18 00:58:19 UTC
Just because I was told nobody has said it; I don't believe it but more crying wont help so:

"gee this is awesome!"
Hauling Hyena
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#462 - 2014-05-18 00:59:52 UTC
Attention, please welcome sarcasm on the stage!

Maxdig wrote:
"gee this is awesome!"
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#463 - 2014-05-18 01:12:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kristalll wrote:
They also cost 6x as much, GREATLY increasing your chances of gank.
Not particularly greatly unless someone is specifically out to hurt your wallet rather than pad their own.

I mean, sure, I hear the argument a lot and it makes sense, but it requires a very different and much rarer intention on the gankers' part, so it's not nearly as bad as it's often made out to be.

Digger Pollard wrote:
Freighter was already too vulnerable, now it's even more vulnerable, hauls less, and costs another freighter to make it just a bit less terrible and still a lot worse than it were.
Nah. They weren't particularly vulnerable to begin with unless you flew them in an unsafe manner, and now they can be made very sturdy indeed. The entire point with this change, as the proponents so often pointed out, is that now you get to choose what it will be good at. Making them less vulnerable is one of those options.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#464 - 2014-05-18 01:13:16 UTC
Kristalll wrote:
Rittel wrote:
Can you not just give freighters a sub-system slot with the option between 3 systems based around Cargo, Agility and Tank?

That way we can have the choice to fit how we see fit without having to rip out 2 T2 rigs or buy a whole new freighter!



Yes, lets jsut make all rigs removable while we're at it.


This would have far-reaching implications that would need them all to be balanced downwards. Rigs are meant to be permanent design choices of the ship you are flying.

I would agree that wanting the best of both worlds, and the drawbacks of neither, does seem to be a common theme in this thread though.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Rockstara
Reaction Scientific
#465 - 2014-05-18 01:13:32 UTC
wow.

This is a terrible balance. I expect better from fozzie.
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#466 - 2014-05-18 01:21:23 UTC  |  Edited by: El Space Mariachi
yessss go- i mean CCP Fozzie, nerf the freighter EHP! We here at Finkelberg, Weinstein and Associates' Freighter Asset Repossession Team thank you for your good work. You're a true edel mensch. Hope you got the kickback slider we sent as thanks!

Heh heh heh.... all according to keikaku

gay gamers for jesus
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#467 - 2014-05-18 01:27:58 UTC
Without a low slot this update is nothing but herp a derp.

I am actually embarrassed for the balance team.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#468 - 2014-05-18 01:33:55 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Without a low slot this update is nothing but herp a derp.

I am actually embarrassed for the balance team.

Why would you want to see them even more nerfed than this?
Aram Kachaturian
Aram Pleasure Hub Holding
#469 - 2014-05-18 01:37:12 UTC
Solid balance, thanks CCP.

This fanfest was one of the best and the company seems stronger than ever.

Cant wait the new skins for freighters ;-) !

Servant of the Secret League, Wielder of the Monocle Clubhouse Flame.
It Maybeatrap
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#470 - 2014-05-18 01:38:31 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Without a low slot this update is nothing but herp a derp.

I am actually embarrassed for the balance team.

Why would you want to see them even more nerfed than this?

Next change:
Freighters get +1 low slot and lose 80% hull hp.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#471 - 2014-05-18 01:42:10 UTC
It Maybeatrap wrote:
Next change:
Freighters get +1 low slot and lose 80% hull hp.

Lol

80% would probably be overkill, but since even a T1 suitcase doubles your hull EHP, a reduction in the 50% region wouldn't be at all surprising.
Ironathel
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#472 - 2014-05-18 01:42:36 UTC
I'm going to preface this by saing that I generally don't complain about all the rebalancing and tweaks that cpp make, at least they are trying to make the game more interesting.

But I'm afraid I can't say I share the same view with these changes. Lets just take a reality check here - these are ships used to haul crap from A to B they are not some OP combat machine. It is probably the most boring and pointless part of the game - I'd challenge ccp to demonstrate how any of this actually adds value to a players experience more than any other activity they could be doing with their time. The reality is you either have a bunch of people wasting their time manually flying or an army of afk autopiloting toons slowly migrating between trade hubs in hisec. At the end of the day what does any of this activity achieve for the game - not much as far as I'm concerned.

So basically all I see from these changes is I get to spend more isk using more jump fuel, moving smaller amounts of m3, in an even more expensive ship and taking longer to do it.... there are some stats Fozzie seems to have forgotten in the equation ... boredom +10%, time wasting +5%, fun -5% ...

Why would I continue to pay for my sub when I'm getting to spend less time actually doing something fun? At this rate I might as well go buy train simulator or something and be done with it.

Just my 2 cents.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#473 - 2014-05-18 01:44:23 UTC
Kaahles wrote:
And for JF's? TBH those nerfs don't go far enough as far as I am concerned because if you have half a functioning brain and know how the game works the likelyhood of losing your JF is pretty damn slim to almost nonexistent. Breaks the whole risk vs reward thing.



Everyone loves to throw around Risk vs reward like they know wtf they are talking about.

There is more to risk than just how easy or hard it is to die.

Everytime I undock a JF I am putting a 6.2 bil hull at risk. That alone is a pretty big risk.

When I run a 0.0 jump freighter contract I could easily have upwards of 5bil of cargo in the hold. Thats 11.5 Billion isk I'm putting at risk jumping into hostile 0.0 space.

And for what? Maybe a 150-200mil reward? I'd be hard pressed to believe that anyone actually doing this is sitting there thinking "oh yea this is totally OP, I should be easier to kill"

Yes if I do everything right my overall risk of death is fairly low. Yet there are still thousands that get killed.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#474 - 2014-05-18 01:52:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
It Maybeatrap wrote:
Next change:
Freighters get +1 low slot and lose 80% hull hp.

Lol

80% would probably be overkill, but since even a T1 suitcase doubles your hull EHP, a reduction in the 50% region wouldn't be at all surprising.


Buying and fitting a DCU would not be as hard of a cost hit as fitting 2 capital rig...
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#475 - 2014-05-18 02:00:23 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Kristalll wrote:
Rittel wrote:
Can you not just give freighters a sub-system slot with the option between 3 systems based around Cargo, Agility and Tank?

That way we can have the choice to fit how we see fit without having to rip out 2 T2 rigs or buy a whole new freighter!



Yes, lets jsut make all rigs removable while we're at it.


This would have far-reaching implications that would need them all to be balanced downwards. Rigs are meant to be permanent design choices of the ship you are flying.

I would agree that wanting the best of both worlds, and the drawbacks of neither, does seem to be a common theme in this thread though.


The issue I personally see with the change is to integrate some options, they pretty much jacked the price of freighter/JF up a lot. If they had went with 2 low slots limited to only bulkhead, inertia stab and cargo expander, they would introduce pretty much the same choice (tank/agility/cargo) without needed to slap hundred of millions worth of rigs on them.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#476 - 2014-05-18 02:01:47 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Tippia wrote:
It Maybeatrap wrote:
Next change:
Freighters get +1 low slot and lose 80% hull hp.

Lol

80% would probably be overkill, but since even a T1 suitcase doubles your hull EHP, a reduction in the 50% region wouldn't be at all surprising.


Buying and fitting a DCU would not be as hard of a cost hit as fitting 2 capital rig...



no, where in lies the opposite problem. doubling ur tank for next to nothing.

it would take a much greater shift of HP's from structure into shield and armour to stop the DC from being stupidly powerful.

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
Ben Hatton
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#477 - 2014-05-18 02:06:58 UTC
Cool so, um, can you forget we ever asked for rigs or to be able to modify our freighters and lets just keep what we have? Please?

Cool thanks Cool
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#478 - 2014-05-18 02:14:33 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Tippia wrote:
It Maybeatrap wrote:
Next change:
Freighters get +1 low slot and lose 80% hull hp.

Lol

80% would probably be overkill, but since even a T1 suitcase doubles your hull EHP, a reduction in the 50% region wouldn't be at all surprising.


Buying and fitting a DCU would not be as hard of a cost hit as fitting 2 capital rig...



no, where in lies the opposite problem. doubling ur tank for next to nothing.

it would take a much greater shift of HP's from structure into shield and armour to stop the DC from being stupidly powerful.


If your hull HP take a 50% hit with the addition of low slot, a DCU barely give you anymore HP in the form of resist to armor and shield. I definitely don't think it should get a low slot at no cost.
Spectre Wraith
Darwin Inc.
#479 - 2014-05-18 02:20:50 UTC
Kristalll wrote:
Spectre Wraith wrote:
I'm going to side on the "what the ****" side of this argument. You could have just made packaged capitals unhaulable rather then nerfing freighters/JF down to where the whole rig announcement is almost useless. Yes, overall they got a 'bonus', but a few % AFTER they apply the new rigs isn't a bonus, it's a slap in the face to those who pilot these ships.

Disapprove =/


Well **** balancing I guess.

Reducing the cargo capacity had nothing to do with hauling capitals, it had everything to do with balance.

Now instead of getting cargo capacity and tank, you get to choose which one you want more at a sacrifice to the other. Y'know...like fit a ship for a purpose.


You say that, yet in the same post they list the cargo reduction, they make note of increasing packaged capitals. Hauling capitals was infact a consideration to this cargo reduction.

Dear lord, please help me deal with the insufferable....
Emizeko Chai
Freight Club
#480 - 2014-05-18 02:23:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Emizeko Chai
beerthief wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

T1 rigs are easily enough to bring normal freighters above their current cargo values.


CCP Fozzie wrote:

and with T1 cargo rigs their cargo holds will be between 4 and 7% smaller than current.


one of these is not like the other


Your first quote is referring to T1 freighters. Your second quote is referring to T2 jump freighters.