Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Here's a straightforward way to make it a cross between light nerf and small improvement -- instead of whacking stats so hard that you can't get 'back to par' even with T2 rigs ...

Overall
Use capital rigs (to set appropriate resource cost)

Freighters:
Drop cargo capacity 26.25%, so that it takes two T1 cargo rigs to get back to par
Drop EHP such that it takes one T1 hull HP rig to get back to par
... this would mean spending ~10% of the value of your ship to keep it current. Not horrible.
If you choose to go T1/T2/T2, you're spending ~100% of ship's value for modest improvement in one or two areas.

Jump Freighters
It's obvious they want to nerf them more than a little; so that pilots feel they're getting something out of their beating --
Drop cargo by 15%, agility by 11.7%, and EHP by {T1 Hull HP rig} -- so you can keep two of three at par ... or spend ~15% the value of your ship and have a slight bump in two [but still the nerf in the third].

You do realise that it would be a rig that increases range but decreases efficiency and/or a rig that increases efficiency but decreases range. And you'd get a general nerf to efficiency and range up front.

I love the idea of lowslot fitting on freighters, but I firmly believe the DCU is too potent to balance a ship with such insane amounts of structure. Remove the ability to fit a DCU on a freighter if you give it a low slot.

then you're forcing all freighters to armour tank.

Tu quoque is a fallacy.

You're the one who said that their capabilities aren't sufficient for you.

…and since “mention” also means “reference” that's hardly a surprise. You referenced them. You even mentioned them by name. The mention is there, no matter how much you claim it isn't. You have decided that you will only accept the meaning “bring up”, which means you have dived head first down the true scotsman well, and now have trouble getting back to the surface. The fallacy does not disprove the fact of what you did.

They could still hull tank with bulkheads, but I still think that the best method of doing that would be to alter bulkhead fitting requirements and just make sure a DC would be out of reach for what you can get onto a freigther.

So I really wonder what the effects would be if bulkheads became free to fit. Are any ships that could currently benefit from fitting them barred from doing so? Are there any ships where it's currently impossible to do so and where making it possible to fit bulkheads would massively alter their balance?

we've been through this; you did.

as much as it's amusing to watch you say you didn't even though the post has been quoted and linked several times, it's getting boring listening to you drowning in denial.

You are aware that bulkheads will reduce cargo, right?

Cargo capacity is the raison d'être for freighters / jump freighters.

CCP Fozzie wrote:

We are also going to swap the speed penalty on all reinforced bulkhead modules to an equal percentage cargo capacity penalty. The agility penalty will remain intact at this time.

slight revision; then you're excluding freighters the option of shield tanking without that strange pseudo fitting low slot module.

You are aware that bulkheads will reduce cargo, right?

Cargo capacity is the raison d'être for freighters / jump freighters.

CCP Fozzie wrote:

We are also going to swap the speed penalty on all reinforced bulkhead modules to an equal percentage cargo capacity penalty. The agility penalty will remain intact at this time.