Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Yes making Freighters T3 would add all of those things.. and would be stupid.

I don't want to wait 6 months for people to find the tech to reverse engineer, research it, make BPC's, manufacture it, and get it in such quantities that I can afford it.

If this was some NEW line of ships, then by all means suggest it.. But this is an existing line of ships.
Ships without subsystems DO NOT FUNCTION. You cannot fly it, or undock it. And day one of your grand idea, there would be 0 subsystems.. Now while that would be great if I was someone who manufactured Orca's, since I don't that would be nothing but a clusterfuckl.

Also, yes, I'm saying that that Jumpfreighter is just as screwed. If JF's get caught, they die. It's also while you'll never see one with those resists, you'll see bulkheads when it's empty moving around, and Cargo when it's not, cause it jumps from Highsec to a station cyno in low/null.. or jumps from Null to a highsec gate in low/null that's scouted and free of danger.. it'll then dock, and transfer it's cargo to regular freighters. If it's caught in Null/Low, it dies, regardless. If it's ganked in Highsec is dies, regardless.. no one flys a freighter around with Logi, and boosters, etc.. The only time it might even be a little thing is Burn Jita.. but building a game around that is stupid.

Get your heads out of EFT and back into how people actually play the game.

If that is in fact the case, then everything in the changes is a waste of time. Devs have just wasted everyone's time by adding lowslots.
That is a shame, freighters will be no better or worse than they are now.
Did you even read my proposal or just get as far as the word "subsystem" and stop?

I hope that box is big enough that you don't get cramped, seems you will be in it a good while.

Like I said, I hope the box you hide in is big enough to sustain & contain your narrow minded views.
There is no hope at all if your "vision" of what is acceptable spreads.

Guess I best file a petition then, and we know how well that will go. Guilty until proved even more guilty. Wonder if your forum logs will show anything?

One fed up and disillusioned small time nobody in eve.

Those two statements are equivalent. People cried enough to get this, claiming they only wanted customizable freighters.

Now they're revealed as having just been fishing for a buff, and their tears are delightful.

If you're getting slots (and there's no disputing that it's happening now), then you are getting nerfs to compensate. As a matter of fact, they weren't harsh enough, the freighters got too much EHP in shield and armor in this phase, compared to the rigs iteration.

Exactly. They'd have been happy with the first iteration if the stat buffs were larger. Like the 2nd iteration. Except they also packaged it with MUCH easier and cheaper customization. If anything, the stats should have taken a serious hit once low-slots became the customization method of choice.

It seemed that the first iteration was far more balanced because:

A) the base stats were low enough they didn't result in ridiculous 650-720 EHP Jump Freighters. EHP was topping out below 500K in the first run.

B) There was a significant ISK cost associated with those increases in performance. (Rigs) Higher costs are a sacrifice for the freighter operator - and mean larger killmails for the gankers.

C) Bonus for the EVE economy - creating a huge 'salvage' sink - much needed due to CCP adding so many things to make it exclusively easier for carebears (yet, interestingly, not salvage ninjas) to do.

Massively tanked ships holding 130 m^3 or more are out of line with anything that is currently available in highsec, and represent a significant shift in game balance in favor of haulers - and I didn't realize that was the goal of this balance pass.

I'm not big on drama-laden posts, but when I saw the horribly skewed new EHP graph I had thought it was our turn to point out inconsistencies - which I think we did with no shortage of class and logic.

Still, we seem to be being ignored pretty solidly.

I read a couple of points in your post, as follows:

1) People are exaggerating EHP gains
-If I may direct your attention to http://themittani.com/news/kronos-freighter-rebalance-revisited and the EHP chart: as I've said a whole lot of times, maximum EHP downside is 20% (and in some cases no loss whatsoever) versus Rubicon, maximum upside is 157%, and only in one situation (3 expanders) do freighters or JFs lose EHP. As mentioned before, if Fozzie's looking to make a serious bump to F/JF EHP and prohibitively raise the barrier to entry for suicide ganking, then he ought to stop by and say so. However, see below quotation from Fozzie in original post:



It seems to me like Fozzie was naturally concerned about the penalty provided by expanded cargoholds, and shifted the entire graph to the right. Well, as it turns out, that graph got thrown pretty far to the right - preserving a minimal EHP downside but giving up to 150% gain in EHP for those not carrying much.

2) Because people autopilot now they're going to be just as defenseless in the future.
-You are making grand assumptions about how people will be fitting their freighters, which you have no place or data to make. Those comparing to miners are comparing apples and oranges, since mining upgrades always give benefit to miners while expanded cargoholds are useless to those not carrying big big big packages.

3) Gankers will gank anything and everything, and have a limitless supply of manpower and resources
-Blatantly false, and another example of someone trying to make assumptions on exactly what we gankers do.

Let me instead take you back to 2012 - Burn Jita 1 had just concluded nicely a few months ago, my little infant Ministry of Love was scrambling around highsec dying to wartargets (not so much changed, that has) and ganking miners here and there. And then 'lo, we figure out we can hit freighters, and suddenly we notice people carrying multiple dozens of billions of isk in their holds. In the next year, those freighters very very swiftly die, and like Japan's 'scientific' operations in the Pacific and Antarctic, we threaten the ecosystem of really really big-money whales.

People begin to get cautious, especially around 0.5s and about hauling big money in general - we see a far lower average of money being run around, with a higher incidence of webbers and other escorts for those carrying more than a couple of billion. Once upon a time we would see ten to twenty billion isk freighters as a matter of course, with the big ones at 50b. Now, the top-end is ten, and anything above that is a unicorn.

Either people have no money, or people are and have already been adapting. So then, you tell me how much you know about things staying the same.

The numbers I'm quoting is not 'perfect boosts', or logi or any of that.
Last time I played around with the numbers, 720K EHP is the Anshar with a 5% hull implant, LVL 5 skills and Bulkheads.

Which is, incidentally, what I'm going to be using for hauling going forward. I like the Nomad, but its EHP is significantly worse and it needed to be babysat while hauling more than 3 Billion in goods.

It will be nice to haul 6-7 Billion in it, while autopiloting, without seriously worrying about getting ganked - simply due to gank math.

But Fozzie really shat the bed on this one.

A potentially interesting rebalance turned into 'yet another carebear patch'.

It would not - but the numbers you just threw out are not in fact appropriately scaled to the current attribute change to freighters and jump freighters.