Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Really with jump freighters given they are intended operate in dangerous space. Why don't they have a better tank? Why don't they have high slots? Really I should be able to install on my JF at least a point defense able to take on a frigate or 2.

Like wise give the freighters some high slots as well. Currently a freighter can be locked down by a newbie frigate without any recourse in LS/NS/WH.

Maybe the min, or ammar ships should get a modest drone able to fit a flight of drones instead of high slots.

Don't get me wrong I'm not asking for battleship level fittings, but more like very low end of cruiser or destroyer dps. Some thing a modestly tanked cruiser, or even well flown frigate can tank for long enough for friends to arrive, and a any well tanked cruiser and above could tank indefinitely.

They do have a better tank. a much better tank. And will get an even better tank if you choose to do with less cargo space. But the best tank for a Jump Freighter is ensuring it avoids trouble to begin with. Because generally, no matter what you tank is, if you're 7 billion ISK ship gets caught it will die just like it was a Supercarrier.

SiSi also has base for Rhea at 143,000m3 cargo

OP has 144,000m3


Dunno which is correct honestly....

The problem isn't logistics or material supply. It is the absolute compulsion of nullsec to blast or attempt to enslave every miner, hauler and moon miner that shows any interest in nullsec game play rather than simply extending a corp invite and working with players that like doing these things.

CCP can do whatever it likes to make nullsec industry viable except stop nullsec alliances from working against its own best interests by placing more value on 10 more titans rather than 100 more farmers.

@CCP Fozzie: I've just realized that you're sort of painted in a corner by having 3 slots (or previously, 3 rigs) to work with.


First, I'm assuming that your goal was to make these ships more customizable, without significantly boosting their power - ie you didn't want to see a 500K ehp freighter or one with 3 million cubic metres of cargo. This seems reasonable. So a nerf accorss the board was needed to reduced the post-rigged stats. But what stats? A freighter has 3 important stats:

- Cargo space

- Tank

- Align time

(There is also warp speed but let's ignore that one for now as I believe the above 3 are more important. You'll see my argument is still valid with those.)

So in theory, if you had one cargo rig, one tank rig and one agility (ie align time) rig, you would have about the same results as before... but that can't work! If that was the case, having (using cargo as an example) a ship with 2 cargo rigs would have had a fair bit more of cargo, and 3 cargo rigs would have massive cargo. So the only way to make this work was to have the nerf serious enough that only by putting 3 rigs in one stat would you exceed previous capacity, at a significant cost to the other 2.

This design space of "3 stats, 3 slots, don't buff too much" leads to an almost inescapable nerf. You may find that having *less* slots may make balancing these ships easier?

Lastly, I'll note t hat I haven't had time to fully digest the switch from rigs to low-slots, but I think the point remains.

A good point was raised few pages back.

What about different fuel consumption the JF's currently have per light-year? Now that their cargo capacities are pretty much the same it might make sense also to make the fuel consumption pretty much the same for all races as otherwise you will end with just one "good" JF.

---

And a bit more about regular capitals in hi sec which was discussed a number of pages back (related to increasing their packaged sizes up so that regular freighters could not be used to haul them to hi sec).

The main reason why they are not allowed is probably roqual I would guess. As I pointed out dreads and carriers are not really an issue in hi sec (other than grabbing gank catalysts from a carrier and possibly its leadership bonuses when running gang links).

On the other hand having the ability would mean occasional regular freighter jumping into lowsec and coming back out with max cargo expanders on. Plus ofc all the joy of people who would be ganking freighters afkpiloting with their carriers and dreads towards jita to sell in the hub with max cargo expanders on ;)

Hmm... now the gankers are whining, so the change from rigs to low slot modules must actually be a buff.

I'm pretty happy to jump here at page 119 without having read a single post of this monster-of-a-threadnought but sorry guys you're all wrong. Rebalancing JF&F should be done adding new special rigs to the market, available only for said ship. Their use should be to create specialized and additional cargobays, at the expense of normal cargo.

Just like their lil sisters, the new gallente Kryos/Miasmos and such. If you want to modify your Rhea because you live at the end of the universe and only use it to move moongoo to build your alliance's needs, then go for it: purchase a "MoonGoo modifier" and then all of a sudder your Rhea won't be able to carry anymore 350k of *stuff* but maybe only 50k of *stuff* + 500k of MoonGoo. Of course only 1 per ship and must destroy the rig/modifier to plug a new one.

Same for ice, ores, minerals, PI, hulls, ammo...... plexes!! Anything logi guys needs to move.

This would create a new exclusive market for logi fellas (not influencing cap rigs market and/or other markets), would create specialization, would even create a new need for JF&F hulls since you may be willing to have 2 or 3 of those things and guess what? it would also make sense ;)

Well...... waiting to be punished with an "already discussed and discarded at page 3" hammer on my head.

you want nerfs?

because this is how you get nerfs.

Heh, pretty sure Fozzie has to give credit to mynnna on that one, to be honest. The entire thing is almost in lockstep with his suggested changes.

Although I still want the shield and armor buffs scaled back a fair bit.