These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#2341 - 2014-05-23 12:55:56 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Major Trant wrote:
My alts fly Charons and Rheas and generally I think this is a good step in the right direction. However, this mish mash with the low CPU and role bonus towards Bulkheads is really a poor design decision, motivated by laziness. You are frightened of the maths involved and the permentations in allowing a Damage Control to be fitted aren't you?

Grasp the nettle and do it. Just give a decent CPU upgrade and forget the role bonus. Eve is meant to be a sandbox, let people fit what they want to fit in the lows. Don't be frightened of the whiners. Sure the suicide gankers are going to whine that it is another carebear buff. While the carebears are going to whine that they can't AFK haul. Nerf the hull HP some more if you want, but give people some real variety options.


Yeah I'd have just done this. The great thing about the DC is its active nature. If you balance around HP with a DC active, then anyone APing around will have theirs off and hence be very vulnerable.

Which is fine. If they're empty, this is no big deal, as they're not going to get ganked - although they may get assassinated, meaning that they've been specifically targeted as a pilot. If they're APing with valuable cargo with DC off, then they deserve everything they get.

CCP may have thought that the difference in EHP between DC on and off was just too great though. Or is the risk of scripts to auto-activate the DC too great?



DC2 would also be incredibly powerful for the size of cargo it carries, screwing up the entire risk/reward equation. So the base stats would have to be nerfed into the ground to compensate, negating the entire idea of choice in the first place. Alternatively the DC2 fit would be allowed to roam freely, but that would majorly upset balance.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2342 - 2014-05-23 12:56:29 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:

CCP may have thought that the difference in EHP between DC on and off was just too great though. Or is the risk of scripts to auto-activate the DC too great?


I think they took into account that these ships are flown the way they are precisely because the pilot does not want to be paying continuous attention to it. Those people would be dying in droves.

Nevermind that, for the people who are paying attention, it would render functional invicibility. Those people would never die.

Neither of those two outcomes is desirable.

"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.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#2343 - 2014-05-23 12:56:48 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Major Trant wrote:
My alts fly Charons and Rheas and generally I think this is a good step in the right direction. However, this mish mash with the low CPU and role bonus towards Bulkheads is really a poor design decision, motivated by laziness. You are frightened of the maths involved and the permentations in allowing a Damage Control to be fitted aren't you?

Grasp the nettle and do it. Just give a decent CPU upgrade and forget the role bonus. Eve is meant to be a sandbox, let people fit what they want to fit in the lows. Don't be frightened of the whiners. Sure the suicide gankers are going to whine that it is another carebear buff. While the carebears are going to whine that they can't AFK haul. Nerf the hull HP some more if you want, but give people some real variety options.


Yeah I'd have just done this. The great thing about the DC is its active nature. If you balance around HP with a DC active, then anyone APing around will have theirs off and hence be very vulnerable.

Which is fine. If they're empty, this is no big deal, as they're not going to get ganked - although they may get assassinated, meaning that they've been specifically targeted as a pilot. If they're APing with valuable cargo with DC off, then they deserve everything they get.

CCP may have thought that the difference in EHP between DC on and off was just too great though. Or is the risk of scripts to auto-activate the DC too great?


Ytterbium hinted at DC possibly becoming passive.
Dave Stark
#2344 - 2014-05-23 13:03:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Gregor Parud wrote:
Ytterbium hinted at DC possibly becoming passive.

look at passive vs active hardeners for both armour and shield.

do you really think the DCII would retain its stats if it were made passive?

and that's before we point out how insanely powerful the DCII is, regardless of comparisons to other modules.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#2345 - 2014-05-23 13:07:28 UTC
Interestingly is it (just barely) not possible to fit a civilian damage control on a JF. Even if you use 2 estamel's co procs, genolution set, and 6% CPU hardwiring. Very, very close though.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2346 - 2014-05-23 13:17:06 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
Interestingly is it (just barely) not possible to fit a civilian damage control on a JF. Even if you use 2 estamel's co procs, genolution set, and 6% CPU hardwiring. Very, very close though.


The though of using officer fitting mods to enable to use of a single civilian module is interesting.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2347 - 2014-05-23 13:18:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


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


Dunno if it will happen but if it does, it will probably be in a re-pass after release when they get actual in-game data.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#2348 - 2014-05-23 13:19:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I think they took into account that these ships are flown the way they are precisely because the pilot does not want to be paying continuous attention to it. Those people would be dying in droves.

Nevermind that, for the people who are paying attention, it would render functional invicibility. Those people would never die.

Neither of those two outcomes is desirable.


Yeah, I guess the difference between DC and no DC is just too much. Oh well. Smile
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2349 - 2014-05-23 13:25:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Gypsio III wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I think they took into account that these ships are flown the way they are precisely because the pilot does not want to be paying continuous attention to it. Those people would be dying in droves.

Nevermind that, for the people who are paying attention, it would render functional invicibility. Those people would never die.

Neither of those two outcomes is desirable.


Yeah, I guess the difference between DC and no DC is just too much. Oh well. Smile


Pretty much yeah.

Even a conservative nerf of about 35% to all hitpoints would make it capable to take down a freighter with 2 4 Taloses.

"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.
Warr Akini
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#2350 - 2014-05-23 13:28:19 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Even a conservative nerf of about 35% to all hitpoints would make it capable to take down a freighter with 2 Taloses.


I'm not really sure about that? They'd have to come down to 50-70k ehp range for that to be feasible.

Waiting for CCP Fozzie comment on if he wants stupid-EHP'd freighter/JFs in highsec.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2351 - 2014-05-23 13:29:40 UTC
Warr Akini wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Even a conservative nerf of about 35% to all hitpoints would make it capable to take down a freighter with 2 Taloses.


I'm not really sure about that? They'd have to come down to 50-70k ehp range for that to be feasible.

Waiting for CCP Fozzie comment on if he wants stupid-EHP'd freighter/JFs in highsec.


Yeah that was a huge derp, I meant to say 4. Thanks.

"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.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#2352 - 2014-05-23 13:35:26 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Ytterbium hinted at DC possibly becoming passive.

look at passive vs active hardeners for both armour and shield.

do you really think the DCII would retain its stats if it were made passive?

and that's before we point out how insanely powerful the DCII is, regardless of comparisons to other modules.


That wasn't the point.
Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#2353 - 2014-05-23 13:36:50 UTC
I rather like the fact that, as an active module, the DC2 penalises the EHP of autopiloting freighters (take that, people going AFK on incredibly long and boring journeys!).

I suspect one of the reasons allowing a DC2 on freighters make things incredibly hard to balance is the fact that they are so effective- most ships do not structure tank, so the DC2 effects on structure EHP are negligible compared to Shield/Armor tanks. As long as the freighter's tank is mainly in structure, if a DC2 can be fit it become a practically mandatory module.

The only two real solutions are: not permitting a DC module (as the rig and hacky low-slot approaches do), or rebalancing freighters as proper ships with proper shield/armour tanks and the slots that go with that. The typical racial differentiators would then become more profound in differentiating the freighters by slot layout
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#2354 - 2014-05-23 13:46:59 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Interestingly is it (just barely) not possible to fit a civilian damage control on a JF. Even if you use 2 estamel's co procs, genolution set, and 6% CPU hardwiring. Very, very close though.


The though of using officer fitting mods to enable to use of a single civilian module is interesting.



Officer co-procs are dirt cheap, due to their incredibly limited range of uses. One is the 8-booster command ship. The other is... not this.
Cameron Hages
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2355 - 2014-05-23 13:53:31 UTC
So is it just me or do Caldari freighters get the **** end of this deal. All races are capable of good armor tanking, except Caldari, and giving everyone else the ability to close their gaps, while a emp round will tear us a new one seems unfair. I think balance should be made around DCU2 not armor mods.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2356 - 2014-05-23 13:56:23 UTC
Cameron Hages wrote:
So is it just me or do Caldari freighters get the **** end of this deal. All races are capable of good armor tanking, except Caldari, and giving everyone else the ability to close their gaps, while a emp round will tear us a new one seems unfair. I think balance should be made around DCU2 not armor mods.


You could always hull tank with bulkheads...
Hiryu Jin
noXCorp
#2357 - 2014-05-23 14:11:06 UTC
I don't understand how everyone is so excited for these changes. It's like a politician comes out and says we're raising taxes 50%. Then a week later he says ok, we've heard your complaints, so we'll only raise the taxes 25%. So everyone starts sucking his **** about what a benevolent being he is... HOORAY! -,-
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2358 - 2014-05-23 14:26:57 UTC
Hiryu Jin wrote:
I don't understand how everyone is so excited for these changes. It's like a politician comes out and says we're raising taxes 50%. Then a week later he says ok, we've heard your complaints, so we'll only raise the taxes 25%. So everyone starts sucking his **** about what a benevolent being he is... HOORAY! -,-

That is an opinion. While the rig idea was awful the customization idea is good. you no longer have to buy a whole new freighter to fill a certain role. You can just refit and choose your ship based on the most important attribute to you.
Jakar Th'al
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#2359 - 2014-05-23 14:40:56 UTC
The one thing I like about the new ships is the chance to vary fits for the go/return legs of the trip.

The grating part is that I can fit an adaptive nano plating on lowslots (3x Coreli for example) and increase the hitpoints considerably on the 'armour flavoured' freighters.

This is way less effective on the shield flavour ones of course ... and we all know its ganking that colours the issue. The more HP/resists the better chance you have of surviving. The Amarr and Gallente get a lot in this context, sadly the others get nothing.
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#2360 - 2014-05-23 14:55:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vhelnik Cojoin
Executive summary for CCP Devs regarding the T1 freighter changes as currently proposed: Excellent, yes please.

I have now had time to tinker on SiSi with CCP Fozzie's latest iteration of freighter changes, and this edition actually seems to work well. It would seem like Tippia was right (wait, isn't that supposed to be Garth?!) in which case these numbers and changes makes a lot of sense to me.

Please note I do not have a qualified opinion on the JF changes, but the T1 freighters now allow for proper - and sensible - customization. I mostly have 3 freighter use cases, all of which are now properly taken into consideration:

  • Travel fit, empty or mostly so: Combination of I-stabs, ODs (flying AFK, surely not?! Big smile ) and Hypers. New and improved option we don't currently have, sounds good.

  • Expensive yet small(ish) cargo: Bulkheads, providing higher EHP than today.

  • Bulky stuff, where every m3 counts: This mostly means hauling uncompressed ore during mining ops. Expanders all the way, or maybe an I-stab in there for good measure, depending on distance to travel. Even at 1.2M m3 of cargo space you cannot really squeeze enough uncompressed HiSec ore into a freighter to make ganking it economically viable. On the other hand, then the reduction in EHP from fitting Expanders still doesn't make the freighter a target for a handful of bored pilots. And if people can be bothered to assemble a fleet large enough to gank the freighter 'for the lulz', then the reduction in EHP won't matter anyway. The freighter would die both today as well as in the future.

Well done Mr. Fuzzy, one 'like' extended.

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