These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Steijn
Quay Industries
#641 - 2014-05-18 10:08:41 UTC
Kaius Fero wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kaius Fero wrote:
I hate ganking, but If this idiocy will hit TQ I will start bumping day and night every freighter that will pass Uedama and Niarja until people will stop hauling and all industry will go to hell.


i like that you're ambitious, but i think bumping freighters in 1 high sec system isn't likely to cause a shutdown of industry.

I have to test this on SISI, but I'm pretty sure that I can bounce on 4-5 freighters at once preventing them to warp away. If more than 2-3 people do this, they could completely shut down a choke point as Uedama. It would be hilarious to do the bumping with a Prospect.


uedama/sivala/niarja, wouldnt take much.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#642 - 2014-05-18 10:10:09 UTC
Esur A'saw Ti wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

I love when people with zero knolage of ganking shiptost about how how ganking is so easy and risk free. Tell us, if its so easy why are there so few kills considering the 500,000 to a million freighter trips made every month?

Oh but I know about ganking, it's not rocket science you know (well maybe it is for you, you don't seems very smart, no offense) and the answer to that question is really simple : lots of people move valuable stuff in t1 haulers, making solo ganking more efficient than any fleet stuff.

Does that mean that we shouldn't change the math that allow a fleet of around 10 catalyst kill a freighter in 0.5 systems? My opinion is no, because it shouldn't happen, if you want to gank with a small fleet you have to use bigger ships.

It's called balance, I'm being objective you are not all you want is more RISK AVERSE PVP PRESS F1 ECKSDEE that's the part of eve that should go like most carebear gameplay.

Pls don't be upset because my logic and posting is superior. Lol


You can't kill a freighter in highsec with just 10 catalysts.
Please prove me wrong.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#643 - 2014-05-18 10:11:50 UTC
Not that I'm entertaining the whole idea as a good one, but my first question is: why rigs? If the argument to support this notion of adding fitting ability to freighters and JFs is to permit more choices in how they are used, then why use rigs which are much more costly to replace and/or refit than traditional modules? Rigs are a much more permanent choice in fitting than other modules. Using rigs in this case means the freighter pilot must throw often millions of isk each time they want to alter the fit in the future. If I had to pick between the two, low slots would offer that same "choices" feature without being nearly as costly in regards to changing and tweaking fits.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Cyrek Ohaya
Blazing Sun Group
#644 - 2014-05-18 10:16:02 UTC
My experience with JFs is that they jump from HS to LS and then to Null without any risk whatsoever, they don't even need align time to do it, what's the trouble then, use an ordinary freighter for highsec.
Steijn
Quay Industries
#645 - 2014-05-18 10:20:50 UTC
Cyrek Ohaya wrote:
My experience with JFs is that they jump from HS to LS and then to Null without any risk whatsoever, they don't even need align time to do it, what's the trouble then, use an ordinary freighter for highsec.


then why do they die in LS and Null?
Heather Namron
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#646 - 2014-05-18 10:23:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Heather Namron
With the reduction to base cargo hold size, the amount of capital cargo bays required to build a freighter should go down right? Ugh

Edit: Looks like Nex Killer got to this point way before I did Oops
Aiphona
5YNT4X 3RR0R
#647 - 2014-05-18 10:25:47 UTC
This is not a rebalance!!

This is a nerf!!!

I have to buy 2 T2 Cargohold rigs for over a Billion Isk to get the same cargo space back on my JF!!!
And then it aligns 16 seconds slower then before!!

Why!!!!!!


I hate these hidden nerfs that CCP only uses as an ISK sink because they need more money.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#648 - 2014-05-18 10:26:07 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:


If the goal is flexibility for a ship, and the result is a major overhaul to base stats, why stop at rigs? Rigs are traditionally a secondary form of augmentation. Mods are where the real flexibility comes in.



Perhaps its baby steps. Rigs are maxed at 3 (or 2) and provide inherently small benefits with penalties. it would be far easier to do rigs than mods.

nano: +10% speed +15% agility for -20% tank...ok
Cargo expander: 27.5% capacity -20% tank -10% speed...ok
damage control: +100% tank, no penalties...wtf?!

the damage control has tremendous power on an Orca, and it would be the same for freighters. The move of more hp% into shield or armour would make me happier to see things like slots, but it'd have to be quite a lot.

Barton Breau wrote:


Either someone correct my finger math or write up a paper what causes beancounting trump reason, trying to sell a 20% increase as "significantly higher".


so if ur energy bills went up 20% in one go u wouldnt call that a significant?

Kaius Fero wrote:

I have to test this on SISI, but I'm pretty sure that I can bounce on 4-5 freighters at once preventing them to warp away. If more than 2-3 people do this, they could completely shut down a choke point as Uedama. It would be hilarious to do the bumping with a Prospect.


do it. i am a freighter pilot.

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

Dirk MacGirk
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#649 - 2014-05-18 10:26:28 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealin'lak wrote:
Gotta appreciate the irony....

1- Use Fanfest to announce the "Awesome addition of rigs to Freighters and Jump Freighters".

2- Get everybody hyped up and expecting a nice addition for their ships.

3- Eventually come out saying that those "awesome additions" to Freighters and Jump Freighters hide what is actually an "intended" (to quote CCP Fozzie) nerf....

It's a REAL sad day when you realize politicians could learn a trick or two from CCP :(


Cant blaim CCP for people thinking they would add rigs without nerfing the freighters to keep them balanced. They were warned this would happen.


baltec - seriously does it matter if some players were warned by a handful of other players? Can we just stipulate for the record that a few people knew the outcome and were proven right. Yes, you were right. Dave was right, Trip was right. I completely agree some of you were involved in previous threads combating the idiots. You should get a medal from everyone else.



I am pretty sure you can dig up every single "buff freighter, give them rigs/modules" thread in the past 12 months and EVERY single one of them will have the "CCP could do that, but they would take something away to counter - is that what you want?"

That is not "some players, warned by handful of others". That is every single on-this-forum advocate being warned about it.
~told you so~


Sorry dude, most people can't take the nonsense of these forums long enough to debate every wish list topic that comes up. When CCP actually starts talking about it, the broader playerbase takes notice. So yeah, the microcosm of standard forum warriors may have been quite active about this topic dating back to when freighters were first introduced. But the only thing that really matters is the here and now.
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#650 - 2014-05-18 10:28:06 UTC
It's like Fozzie has never actually played Eve
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#651 - 2014-05-18 10:28:59 UTC
Steijn wrote:
Cyrek Ohaya wrote:
My experience with JFs is that they jump from HS to LS and then to Null without any risk whatsoever, they don't even need align time to do it, what's the trouble then, use an ordinary freighter for highsec.


then why do they die in LS and Null?


And, indeed, in HS

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#652 - 2014-05-18 10:34:31 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:


Sorry dude, most people can't take the nonsense of these forums long enough to debate every wish list topic that comes up. When CCP actually starts talking about it, the broader playerbase takes notice. So yeah, the microcosm of standard forum warriors may have been quite active about this topic dating back to when freighters were first introduced. But the only thing that really matters is the here and now.


Hah, the only reason I am here is because of Dev posts.
Regardless of what we may feel about this change which is a blatant nerf to freighters (not saying it's bad or good) - if CCP's goal with this it to heavily disrupt and nerf the ability to haul in order to make local-industry businesses more successful then the majority of complains in this thread are moot.

Yes, freighters are being nerfed and have to choose one of several things, which they all have now on TQ, with slight enhancements to attributes if they are willing to cope with massive penalty to the rest. However the fuel consumption nerf, heavy JF nerf and general freighter nerf across the board just seems like a targeted effort to impact mobility of goods in all of EVE negatively. W-Space, lowsec, nullsec, highsec. All of it is affected by this, but I wish they would use more carrot and less stick.
Dirk MacGirk
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#653 - 2014-05-18 10:35:05 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:


If the goal is flexibility for a ship, and the result is a major overhaul to base stats, why stop at rigs? Rigs are traditionally a secondary form of augmentation. Mods are where the real flexibility comes in.



Perhaps its baby steps. Rigs are maxed at 3 (or 2) and provide inherently small benefits with penalties. it would be far easier to do rigs than mods.

nano: +10% speed +15% agility for -20% tank...ok
Cargo expander: 27.5% capacity -20% tank -10% speed...ok
damage control: +100% tank, no penalties...wtf?!

the damage control has tremendous power on an Orca, and it would be the same for freighters. The move of more hp% into shield or armour would make me happier to see things like slots, but it'd have to be quite a lot.


Perhaps baby steps isn't the proper route. I'm well aware that by fully revamping freighters may induce even deeper cuts of the base stats. But why not look at it holistically, the same way they look at every other ship in the game. Otherwise each babystep is just going to be met with the same level of back and forth "OMG its a nerf" and "LOL we told you so" that this change is getting. And for what? Rigs. Then going forward it will just be more forum crap about, "well, now that we've added rigs, how about mods?" If they are going to bother making changes then follow the suit of their other rebalancing initiatives and just do it right. This stinks of half-arsed
Adunh Slavy
#654 - 2014-05-18 10:35:20 UTC
CCP, all you had to do was increase the size of packaged caps. Instead you do something silly. Congrats.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Loki Feiht
Pathfinders.
Shattered Freeholds
#655 - 2014-05-18 10:35:53 UTC
I suppose this could set the stage for a new tech 2 freighter with a similar principle in mind to the old deep space transports (ie lower capacity but very tough)

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858

Giullare
The Candyman is Back
#656 - 2014-05-18 10:38:46 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


But yes, the fact that this is a small reduction in Jump Freighter power is completely intended.


Everytime u post something on this forum you bring bad news for players and dumb changes.

With actual capital rig cargo cost a rhea will end up with approx 93% of its actual cargo with 200 mil isk for a pair of t1 rigs and approx 102% of its actual cargo with a couple of t2 rigs for a cheap price of 1,45 bil.
Well next time you come up with a fresh new idea, write it on a toilet paper... someone will have a better use of it.
Dirk MacGirk
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#657 - 2014-05-18 10:40:08 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:


Sorry dude, most people can't take the nonsense of these forums long enough to debate every wish list topic that comes up. When CCP actually starts talking about it, the broader playerbase takes notice. So yeah, the microcosm of standard forum warriors may have been quite active about this topic dating back to when freighters were first introduced. But the only thing that really matters is the here and now.


Hah, the only reason I am here is because of Dev posts.
Regardless of what we may feel about this change which is a blatant nerf to freighters (not saying it's bad or good) - if CCP's goal with this it to heavily disrupt and nerf the ability to haul in order to make local-industry businesses more successful then the majority of complains in this thread are moot.

Yes, freighters are being nerfed and have to choose one of several things, which they all have now on TQ, with slight enhancements to attributes if they are willing to cope with massive penalty to the rest. However the fuel consumption nerf, heavy JF nerf and general freighter nerf across the board just seems like a targeted effort to impact mobility of goods in all of EVE negatively. W-Space, lowsec, nullsec, highsec. All of it is affected by this, but I wish they would use more carrot and less stick.


Agreed. I suppose if they spelled out their vision, which is oftentimes difficult for them, it may make more sense. Then again it may not or they might not have a real vision so they just go with a half-baked change that they can "iterate" on later (tm)
Oxide Ammar
#658 - 2014-05-18 10:42:08 UTC
Nex Killer wrote:
I have a question about this change the Charon is losing about 30% of its base cargo correct? So does that mean in the BPO is it going to use 30% less capital Cargo Bays? So from needing 105 to only needing 74? Because I think that is only fair with this change.


Good point.

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.

Loki Feiht
Pathfinders.
Shattered Freeholds
#659 - 2014-05-18 10:42:50 UTC
Steijn wrote:
Kaius Fero wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kaius Fero wrote:
I hate ganking, but If this idiocy will hit TQ I will start bumping day and night every freighter that will pass Uedama and Niarja until people will stop hauling and all industry will go to hell.


i like that you're ambitious, but i think bumping freighters in 1 high sec system isn't likely to cause a shutdown of industry.

I have to test this on SISI, but I'm pretty sure that I can bounce on 4-5 freighters at once preventing them to warp away. If more than 2-3 people do this, they could completely shut down a choke point as Uedama. It would be hilarious to do the bumping with a Prospect.


uedama/sivala/niarja, wouldnt take much.


How about starting an initiative to start suicide ganking any type of freighter that passes, especially jf's?
that should mess with things quite nicely if you get enough people.

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858

marVLs
#660 - 2014-05-18 10:46:18 UTC
wow or lol? just to say those changes are that bad