Player Features and Ideas Discussion

thats it, use the butthurt. i love how u call combat one dimensional and then centre ur argument around one part of the game.

dnt mind that ganking is market PvP too. just ignore that many freighter pilots are PvP'ers too.

just stay in that small world of urs. bolt the doors, nail the windows shut. close ur eyes, cover ur ears and dnt let the bad ppl in.

Jesus you like to play devil advocate..... the only problem with that though is this rig would be less beneficial even from the time stand point you mentioned due to how much time these things spend in accel and more specifically deceleration. Ever watched that speed bar? i swear i have spent half a system in decel before lol .

Sure, but the new warp speed mechanics help that a lot — had this been a year ago, it would have made fsck-all difference unless you were jumping through 200 AU systems. These days, you'll see a (beneficial) difference in jumps one tenth that long. It might not be much at that point, but it's there.

Still, yes. For most distances, I'm guessing that a mix of warp speed and agility will give the fastest travel, but I wouldn't discount the benefit you can get out of warp speed alone. 33% off makes a significant difference in absolute terms for something as slug-like as a freighter.

Thats a loaded question - just like "how do you make mining fun? (without making it tedious to those who do it as a profession)", and I can't answer it, as I'm not a game designer and haven't spent much time thinking about it because its fine to me as it is.

One thing that isn't particularly fun is being at the receiving end of a turkey shoot, with the only way to really avoid it is to plan ahead and do ones best to not have it happen in the first place.

A possible, albeit brainfarty and not well thought out, solution would be to make ganks more frequent and less costly to the ganker, but give haulers means to defend themselves and come out ahead if they're smart, lucky, somewhat skillful, or a combination of the three.

That wouldn't just make hauling more exciting than it is, but also promote ganking as a less niche profession that requires skill rather than numbers.

This idea, or any mechanics change of similar magnitude, is a monstrous thing to balance, but I think its whats necessary to affect the game in the way they want.

Numbers nerfs are in this case nothing but low hanging fruits that may be easy to implement, but ultimately aren't likely to change much in the long term.

Hey everyone the Op has now been updated with a revised version of the design. As many of you were anticipating, we will be achieving the goal of customizability through low slots instead of rig slots. Big thanks to everyone who has provided reasoned feedback in the thread and special thanks to the CSM.

The most significant issues raised in the thread about the previous version of the design are:

• The permanence of customizability that relies completely on rigs. As the only classes to have rig slots alone with no fitting slots, Freighters and Jump Freighters would have allowed customization towards a player's most common use cases, but would still lack the very important ability to adjust fittings in response to changing needs and environments.
• The relative lack of interesting choices for Jump Freighter pilots. Due to the very unique situation of Jump Freighters, they did not receive very significant benefits from any rigs other than cargohold optimization. This is partially an issue with the lack of gameplay around JF use and their near complete safety when used optimally, but it also reflected a lack of good options.

To deal with the first issue, we are making the significant change of providing the goal of customizability through low slots rather than rig slots. Keeping this path balanced requires a few extra tricks but we believe that it will provide a more interesting set of gameplay choices for freighter pilots to make on an everyday basis.
All Freighters and Jump Freighters will receive 3 low slots, and not receive any rig slots. They will have very restrictive powergrid and cpu totals, and a special role bonus that allows the use of Reinforced Bulkhead modules.

In Kronos we are also adding a new set of low-slot warp speed enhancing modules that can be obtained through low-sec exploration. These modules will increase warp speed by a flat addition of 0.2, 0.25 or 0.3 au/s each. We expect that these will be popular modules for use on Freighters.

To help address the lack of interesting options for Jump Freighters, we are planning to introduce a set of jump fuel conservation modules in the Crius release in July. These modules will not be available in Kronos.

So we expect that most Freighter and Jump Freighter pilots will use their three low slots to mix and match the following modules to meet their needs:

• Expanded Cargoholds
• Reinforced Bulkheads
• Hyperspatial Accelerators (warp speed modules)
• Inertia Stabilizers
• Overdrive Injector Systems
• (For certain armor tanking fits) Adaptive Nano Platings
• (For Jump Freighters) Capacitor Power Relays
• (For Jump Freighters after the Crius release) Jump Fuel Conservation Modules

The base cargo capacity of Freighters is being decreased so that a set of three Tech Two Expanded Cargoholds adds 21-25% cargo above the previous maximum values. For Jump Freighters, three T2 Expanders will increase cargo capacity by 1-2%.
This means that Freighters can get significantly higher maximum capacity than before using modules, and we're increasing the volume of packaged capital ships (to 1.3 million m3) and unpackaged station containers (to 2 million m3) to compensate.

The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull).

Let us know what you think!

Emphasis mine.

I agree with you, but I don't think opening a wound in terms of numbers nerfs and then leaving it there bleeding until some day perhaps one gets around to apply some band-aid and a long term fix that goes well with it isn't a particularly great course of action.

The problem with the change in its current form is that it doesn't force anyone to do anything locally. It just makes importing slightly more expensive.

Edit: Disregard post, need to think through the new changes - thanks Fozzie :)

It's not a loaded question at all. You specifically said you think there should be "deeper mechanics that offer viable, fun alternatives".

Which is completely asinine if you ask me. There is no "deeper mechanic" for hauling, it's "Get Stuff from point A to point B." That's it, the end. There's no room for "deeper mechanics".



Welcome to EVE.

As for the rest, you keep talking in generalities, which are less than worthless right now. I get it, numbers make you angry. But that's what it's come down to right now.

You can talk about "more skillful" all you want, but this is not a flight sim. You don't get to man your turrets to shoot down the ebil pirates.

All you are doing is talking in generalities that don't even apply to this game.

I guess if you're jumping this thing non stop it will be nice. Mine is rather circumstantial. A jump freighter that takes only an hour and a half to make the distance that used to take 2 hours is irrelevant for me at least as i'm still gonna set that sh*t to autopilot then go see a movie lol.

edit: typed jump freighter, meant just a regular freighter.

Power projection is what creates massive coalitions resulting in boring, stagnant gameplay and empty space. Just because there's *some* stuff happening doesn't mean it's not a borefest. If you can't understand this then I don't know what to tell you.

I like it.





So any chance for Q-ships in the future?

2-3 highs, with 2 turret/launchers, (large or capital size) 6 mids/lows, racially spread, with about half the fitting of a BS or Dread depending on size gun. ( oh and when not targeted turrets blend in the hull, and ship has role bonus to ship scanners.)