These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#721 - 2014-05-18 14:53:04 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Ignorant people claiming it was JF pilots asking for rigs are just
…stating facts, and are being met with abuse now as then when pointing out the obvious consequences.

Quote:
this is really pushing it to make industry local, which is what the big 0.0 alliances wanted, nothing to do with people wanting and not getting improved EHP for their freighters and Jump Freighters.
The big nullsec alliances weren't particularly fussed about industry being local — they just wanted null industry to not be a thoroughly braindead proposition. The Crius changes will address that to some extent, but the main problem is that null industry can't be local. It relies on materials that can't be had locally, but which have to be imported from all over the place (via higsec).

This change makes such imports more annoying and will, if anything, concentrate industry more around the central trading hubs than before. Granted, in many cases it's thoroughly inefficient to import the materials rather than the final product regardless, so the effect will be fairly minor.


That was a most amusing troll post, if you seriously believe all of that then I pity you... Roll

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Vhelnik Cojoin
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#722 - 2014-05-18 15:00:25 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Lets imagine for a second that you don't need to haul anything but those special materials and components. No hulls, ammo, or minerals, available in your local space - nothing. Only those selected items you are absolutely need to import and can't gather them at home. Woulnd't it become even less of a hassle this way then it is now for logistics guys?

No, quite the contrary. The problem is not as much the materials you absolutely need to import in order to run your local production chains of *everything*.

If you *have* to produce as much as possible locally, then you risk loosing the economy of scale, gained when players specialize in manufacturing or collecting particular components or materials.

Access to the large trade hubs in Empire acts as buffers and insurance against scarcity of any bottlenecks in your supply pipeline. Your alliance T2 production won't suddenly grind to a halt, if the local PI enthusiasts decides to take a few weeks off.

Attempting to force as much as possible of the production of *everything* to be local by limiting ease of long distance logistics, would basically be the same as asking the players to do double effort on a *massive* scale. Meaning that it won't happen. It will just result in price increases across the board.

Time is money. Forcing players to do double effort for the same outcome means increased prices.

Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EvE-oconomy and o-kay for you.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#723 - 2014-05-18 15:02:47 UTC
Barton Breau wrote:
That is not given, numbers can be tweaked and extremes accepted (like the new +20% cargo freighters).

That extreme isn't very extreme, for one, but its limiting factor was also able to be adjusted upwards. That is not always the case. In fact, I'd say that it's very rare that it's the case.

But even in your example, look at what those extremes have done: we accept a new upper bound for hauling volume that is 20% higher. That's effectively just one T2 rig. But look what they had to do to compensate for the fact that you can fit three rigs: the other two had to be completely swallowed up by the nerf.

And cargo is a very slight adjustment on the scale of things. Let's take the oft-mentioned DCII for instance. If you could fit one of those on a freighter, you'd almost triple its EHP, before we even fit anything else. That's so way over the top, and it comes so cheaply, that the baseline hull, shield, and armour values had to all come down to compensate so the end result — should someone be so evil as to fit one — would maybe only be that 20%. The mere possibility to fit a DCII requires hull HP to drop by nearly 50%.

Now do this same calculation across every statistic and every possibility and you'll end up with massive nerfs across the board. Of course, you have a limited amount of slots so you can't compensate for all of them — at most you can push one up to the extreme value, or perhaps more sanely, you can push one up to its previous value and compensate a second one half-way. That just leaves every other stat on the ship worse off than before.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#724 - 2014-05-18 15:03:52 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
That was a most amusing troll post, if you seriously believe all of that then I pity you... Roll

So I'm right then, seeing as how you can't present an argument to the contrary and have to go right for continue the ad hominems.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#725 - 2014-05-18 15:07:27 UTC
Vhelnik Cojoin wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
There has to and there are other way to improve and enable industry and self-sustainability in 00 sec. Ways that require a bit more thinking on CCP's and the player side, but that is too much to ask apparently.

Will be interesting to see if Mittens will ask his fellow Goons to venture forth and mine Veldspar in 0.0 for their supercap production, or if they still expect to import compressed ore from HiSec...


Remains to be seen, but one of the CFC posters in this kind of threads (was it Grench?) said, they would not require their members to do this kind of labor. So ... go figure. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#726 - 2014-05-18 15:07:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
That was a most amusing troll post, if you seriously believe all of that then I pity you... Roll

So I'm right then, seeing as how you can't present an argument to the contrary and have to go right for continue the ad hominems.


Well for example you said that null sec alliances were not asking for a buff in manufacturing, which is very very false, that one was so clearly a troll it was amusing, you actually trolled yourself on that one.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#727 - 2014-05-18 15:10:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Vhelnik Cojoin wrote:

Attempting to force as much as possible of the production of *everything* to be local by limiting ease of long distance logistics, would basically be the same as asking the players to do double effort on a *massive* scale. Meaning that it won't happen. It will just result in price increases across the board.

Time is money. Forcing players to do double effort for the same outcome means increased prices.

Until someone will start to actually do what you refer to as infeasible and cut the prices, of course.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#728 - 2014-05-18 15:14:29 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
That was a most amusing troll post, if you seriously believe all of that then I pity you... Roll

So I'm right then, seeing as how you can't present an argument to the contrary and have to go right for continue the ad hominems.


Well for example you said that null sec alliances were not asking for a buff in manufacturing, which is very very false, that one was so clearly a troll it was amusing, you actually trolled yourself on that one.


Tippia did not say that.
Dave Stark
#729 - 2014-05-18 15:15:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#730 - 2014-05-18 15:15:15 UTC
Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.

The numbers are now corrected in the OP.

Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#731 - 2014-05-18 15:18:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.

The numbers are now corrected in the OP.

Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.


Odin help you.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#732 - 2014-05-18 15:18:49 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Well for example you said that null sec alliances were not asking for a buff in manufacturing
So you decided to change from an ad hominem fallacy to a strawman fallacy. Yeah, I think I'll hang on to that “can't prove me wrong so applies fallacy instead” interpretation because it's the only one that makes sense.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#733 - 2014-05-18 15:18:57 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.

The numbers are now corrected in the OP.

Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.


Excellent, thank you very much for that. Pretty sure a bunch of wormhole guys are in the hospital with heart attacks though.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#734 - 2014-05-18 15:20:14 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.

The numbers are now corrected in the OP.

Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.

Bah! Now I have to update my spreadsheets and everything will look much better. Stop ruining our complaints… wait what? Lol
Delhaven
EVE University
Ivy League
#735 - 2014-05-18 15:21:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Delhaven
Just to make sure I've got this straight for Freighters (all numbers are for a Charon with level 5 skills, relative to current):

Option 1, 3 x cargo rigs: +64K m3 cargo, -12K EHP
Option 2, 2 x cargo rigs, 1 x hull HP rig: -117K m3 cargo, +12K EHP
Option 3, 3 x hull HP rigs: -391K m3 cargo, +73K EHP
Option 4, 3 x warp speed rigs: +0.78 AU/sec, -293K m3 cargo, -6K EHP

This is a nerf. You can slightly improve one stat, at a high cost to one other, or at a decrease in multiple stats. Maintaining the status quo for defense means a drop in cargo. So the question is whether this is as intended, like it is with Jump Freighters.
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#736 - 2014-05-18 15:23:03 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Until someone will start to actually do what you refer to as infeasible and cut the prices, of course.

You mean similar to how local prices on the street go down in the real world, when local trade barriers go up?

I don't think so...

Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EvE-oconomy and o-kay for you.

Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
#737 - 2014-05-18 15:24:09 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.

The numbers are now corrected in the OP.

Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.


Derath Ellecon wrote:
Andrea Keuvo wrote:
Odds that Fozzie posts in or even reads this thread again after today? Near zero I would bet.



You really don't know Fozzie then do you?

Given his history so far I'd bet a plex he keeps up on each and every one of the threads he has posted.



Knew I was right
Dave Stark
#738 - 2014-05-18 15:27:40 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Knew I was right

welcome to team 'i told you so', have a t-shirt.
Theng Hofses
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#739 - 2014-05-18 15:30:48 UTC
Cargohold Isotope/LJ m3/isotope/LJ Difference
Nomad 270000 2700 100
195000 4050 48.14814815
Ark 275625 2900 95.04310345 5%
199000 4350 45.74712644 5%
Anshar 281250 3100 90.72580645 10%
203000 4650 43.65591398 10%
Rhea 294375 3300 89.20454545 12%
207000 4950 41.81818182 15%


With the proposed changes the Rhea becomes even more uneconomical to use. As the premium to move a m3 with a Rhea increased from 12% to 15% over the Nomad. Also shouldn't the jump engines be equally efficient?
Aiphona
5YNT4X 3RR0R
#740 - 2014-05-18 15:31:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiphona
Giullare wrote:
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.



^^ this

You are forcing JF pilots to buy 2 T2 rigs for 1.48 BILLION to have the same cargospace.
And then also nerfing the already slow aligning JF with an extra 16 seconds more align time.
This means high-sec ganking will get even more easier! they dont even need to bump it anymore with these align-times.

This is just not acceptable. We already had to pay almost 7 Billion for a Ship with already limited cargo-space.
Why add the extra costs???
Why nerf it??