These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#941 - 2014-05-18 19:46:07 UTC
At least make it so jump freighters can regain their current cargo values or close to it with two T1 cargo rigs instead of needing two T2 rigs.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#942 - 2014-05-18 19:48:13 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'm seeing some good feedback about the unique role of Jump Freighters meaning that they don't get much benefit from rigs other than cargo rigs, and this is indeed a problem that limits player choice. I'm going to bring up a few ways to help solve that issue with the other designers early next week.

You do realize that the PRIMARY REASON people use freighters / jump freighters is because of their cargo capacity, right?

Of course cargo is a priority! Otherwise smaller cargo ships would be used, like Orca or carrier / Rorqual.

There should be no surprise that any proposed reduction of cargo is going to result in a huge backlash against it.
Lyn Fel
Black Frog Logistics
Red-Frog
#943 - 2014-05-18 19:49:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyn Fel
Dave Stark wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lyn Fel wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Commander A9 wrote:
It's already easy enough to take down a freighter through the use of multi-client software

I seriously doubt this has happened more than maybe once or twice ever. It's certainly not common.
Freighter ganking isn't easy even as a group effort among individual players.


This literally happens every day in Niarja and/or Uedama.


See, while people say it does, I wonder if that that's not just an urban legend like the "recycling alts" that people always talk about.

also how do they know it's 1 guy with mutliboxing software, not just 20 really well co-ordinated pilots?


http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23381051

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23364606

Here is one of them. Are you seriously going to try and tell me those aren't an isboxer group?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#944 - 2014-05-18 19:51:49 UTC
Lyn Fel wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Commander A9 wrote:
It's already easy enough to take down a freighter through the use of multi-client software

I seriously doubt this has happened more than maybe once or twice ever. It's certainly not common.
Freighter ganking isn't easy even as a group effort among individual players.


This literally happens every day in Niarja and/or Uedama.


See, while people say it does, I wonder if that that's not just an urban legend like the "recycling alts" that people always talk about.

"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.

Dave Stark
#945 - 2014-05-18 19:53:11 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lyn Fel wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Commander A9 wrote:
It's already easy enough to take down a freighter through the use of multi-client software

I seriously doubt this has happened more than maybe once or twice ever. It's certainly not common.
Freighter ganking isn't easy even as a group effort among individual players.


This literally happens every day in Niarja and/or Uedama.


See, while people say it does, I wonder if that that's not just an urban legend like the "recycling alts" that people always talk about.

also how do they know it's 1 guy with mutliboxing software, not just 20 really well co-ordinated pilots?
Basterd2Vill
#946 - 2014-05-18 19:56:30 UTC
So if I'm to understand this, you've significantly increased fuel cost for Jump Freighters, drastically reduced the base cargo hold and HP with the CHANCE to bring back either EHP or Cargo at a likely gigantic isk cost. I sincerely hope Riot is knocking on your door next. These changes are 100% unwarranted. There are 10 million other things in this game that need to be balanced, nerfing a 7b isk ship who's primary purpose is strictly logistical is not one of them.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#947 - 2014-05-18 19:57:49 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
and there is nothing exact about a significance test either. in fact what should be used as a significance level is entirely open to OPINION, and even when a significance level suggests one thing or the other it is only a suggestion. it is entirely open to interpretation.

Uh no, when you do a significance test at the 90% level you're saying that you want to be 90% certain that your confidence interval contains the true population proportion, or that you want to be 90% certain that rejecting the null hypothesis is correct.

It's about probabilities, not interpretation.


what we said was that it suggested the null hypothesis is correct, but we understood it does not give 100% certainty. u cannot say its exact and un manipulable when ppl use different significant levels for different tests. they pull whatever number they want to use out their arse.

saying the the significance test is open to interpretation is wrong, its not what i meant. whats open to interpretation is ur theory based on the information gathered from the test.

but theres nothing exact about statistics apart from raw data. which can still be collected in various ways and give different out comes.

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

Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#948 - 2014-05-18 19:58:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Jatok Reknar wrote:
Getting a group together, I can imagine is challenging and requires organizational skills

Well, that part is outdated. After isboxer got legalazied and SS can be laundered with ease, it's much easier to just do most of the work by yourself, no need for organizing people and practice together. In fact, capital anti-cargo scan rig which would eat all hull's calibration points as proposed here before, would made a reasonable addtion now.

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

Dave Stark
#949 - 2014-05-18 20:01:08 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
which can still be collected in various ways and give different out comes.

not if you have population data.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#950 - 2014-05-18 20:02:15 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:
Tippia wrote:


Quote:
the point of my post is to try to actually give some choice to the ship owner
You have plenty of choice. The entire problem is that some people assumed all along that being given choice would itself come without a cost, but that was never going to happen — choice itself is too valuable, and the full array of choices you can make have to fit in the overall balance of the game.



I dont ever think anyone assumed choice would come without a cost, I think most imagined that with the introduction of rigs we would have the opportunity to marginally increase cargo and tank ./ or speed, OR massively improve cargo OR tank. Please note the or. The main issue that is created with the current proposed set of changes is that there really isn't a middle ground. If i want to be able to move and ihub or 2 sov upgrades there is more or less only 1 way for me to really rig a freighter, that is hardly choice.

Coming into this thread I fully expected and embraced that there would be at least a marginal nerf in base hauling capacity to both the JF and Freightor, but the degree to which Fozzie nerfed them is amazing. Realistically, freighters were in dire need of a buff, as someone who has been bumped around madrimille for 15 minutes there is no way one can consider the current gank meta fair or balanced. Jump freighters were more or less fine as is and realistically didn't need any change, though having them being able to move 400k m3 would have been kind of nice just because of the aforementioned sov upgrades.

Some things that i think would make this more palatable. (not necessarily all, but pick and choose)

1. Give each races frieghtor / JF a defined role, before they each had some uniqueness, I feel like you have removed some of that as most of them have very similar capacity's now, especially the jfs. It would be cool if there was a reason to spec into multiple races of freightor and each race had a reason to use it above others for certain situations. I.E. Minmatar for speed, Amarr for tank, Caldari for Capacity. This somewhat exists already but it would be nice to see these more defined. This adds some more diversity to the high level logistics play.

2. 2 rigs slots on freightors 1 on jf's, Allow for some choice but make it so we can at least use the base model without having to make the investment into capital rigs i.e. throw away ihub freighters, I really don't want to be using a 3 bil isk freighter in nullsec to get things done.

3. Some agility or warp speed increase, i'm not talking anything massive, but it is hard to resist autopiloting sometime as this is the most boring thing in the game. Your either going to live or your going to die on any given trip, there is little you can do (aside from cargo selection) that is going going to change that.

Do remember that you are already effectively nerfing JF;s with the jump fuel consumption changes, im not seeing why they need additional nerfs. Nor do I see how JF's were contributing to power creep as since empire is central, and jfs move goods from the central location empire to the war front, not matter which front your fighting on HS is usually about the same distance away for both sides. Living in Deep null, it is already pretty expensive to move out to null and back, a 50% increase in cost is going to make a big difference in cost for those of us that are 5 jumps deep.


Good god a common sense post among all the inane chatter from multiple forum trolls black slapping each other over how wonderful they are. +1 to you sir for getting it spot on.

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

Myst Valkyria
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#951 - 2014-05-18 20:03:05 UTC
So...looking at the math...you are making it take almost 1 minute for a freighter to actually align (without any rigs it will be worse with hull rigs). It won't matter how much hull hp you have because you will never get off the gate alive. And that align time is with Evasive Maneuvering 5.

These changes get worse and worse the more you look at them.
Tyr Dolorem
State War Academy
Caldari State
#952 - 2014-05-18 20:03:54 UTC
I swear this thread has just become the same 5 people trolling each other.
Dave Stark
#953 - 2014-05-18 20:04:57 UTC
Tyr Dolorem wrote:
I swear this thread has just become the same 5 people trolling each other.

i think there are more than 4 freighter pilots, and ccp fozzie posting in this thread.
Tyr Dolorem
State War Academy
Caldari State
#954 - 2014-05-18 20:05:32 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Tyr Dolorem wrote:
I swear this thread has just become the same 5 people trolling each other.

i think there are more than 4 freighter pilots, and ccp fozzie posting in this thread.


Actually I was talking about you.
Valterra Craven
#955 - 2014-05-18 20:07:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
I get WHY you are doing alot of the industry oriented changes, but with a few minor exceptions it seems like all of the industry changes are across the board nerfs.

Things are getting more expensive
Things are taking longer to research
Minerals are getting less abundant
Inflation will still be a problem.

While likely a lot of people would disagree I don't think better UI is a buff, but that's neither here nor there.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you are going to follow through with the freighter rig changes, you should balance the across the board nerfs to them by decreasing their build cost. For example a freighter with no rigs at all will be a straight nerf across the board and will have no upsides over the previous freighters. (Sophie's choice on rigs are not upsides IMO) So in terms of balance why dont you cut the mineral cost out of the hull by roughly the same percentage that you are nerfing the ship? This will be more than made up for by the cost adding rigs to the ship.
Dave Stark
#956 - 2014-05-18 20:08:00 UTC
Tyr Dolorem wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Tyr Dolorem wrote:
I swear this thread has just become the same 5 people trolling each other.

i think there are more than 4 freighter pilots, and ccp fozzie posting in this thread.


Actually I was talking about you.


i'm well aware, darling.

i'm flattered.
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#957 - 2014-05-18 20:08:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Vigilanta wrote:

Do remember that you are already effectively nerfing JF;s with the jump fuel consumption changes, im not seeing why they need additional nerfs. Nor do I see how JF's were contributing to power creep as since empire is central, and jfs move goods from the central location empire to the war front, not matter which front your fighting on HS is usually about the same distance away for both sides. Living in Deep null, it is already pretty expensive to move out to null and back, a 50% increase in cost is going to make a big difference in cost for those of us that are 5 jumps deep.

It has already been stated that it was exactly the reason why they were nerfed. You aren't supposed to import all you want, you have to think about founding some local infrastructure. And you are not supposed to dump all the goods you want to highsecs' markets and dominate them, after the summer's industry changes which will improve somewhat nullsecs industry's capacities.

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

Dave Stark
#958 - 2014-05-18 20:09:17 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
Minerals are getting less abundant.

objectively false.

in one of the recent updates, and in one of the coming updates. extra minerals have been added to various ores. minerals are becoming nothing but MORE abundant.
Valterra Craven
#959 - 2014-05-18 20:12:08 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
Minerals are getting less abundant.

objectively false.

in one of the recent updates, and in one of the coming updates. extra minerals have been added to various ores. minerals are becoming nothing but MORE abundant.


50% Decrease across the board to minerals being removed from object refines is making them less abundant. Adding minerals to ores in deep 0.0 does not change this fact. Prices will increase.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#960 - 2014-05-18 20:18:49 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The numbers are now corrected in the OP.


Can you confirm in contrast that the agility nerf to JFs is intentional? (from 0.05 to 0.0625)?