These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

More e-hp to Freighters

First post
Author
THCS
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2014-09-02 17:26:56 UTC  |  Edited by: THCS
Name says it. Haulers should have significantly more tank to discourage successful suicide ganks. More tank = More leveraged isk needed to gank.

IMO the leveraged isk needed to gank should at least be 80% the value of the hull for t1 freighters and 60% for t2 j-freighters.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-09-02 17:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Bullet Therapist
A t2 catalyst in a .5 system can do about 15 thousand damage before concord spawns and costs about 10m isk.

A t2 talos in a .5 system can do about 35 thousand damage before concord spawns and costs about 100m isk.

A well skilled pilot flying an obelisk using t2 reinforced bulkheads can have about 367 thousand ehp.

A well skilled pilot flying a Charon using t2 cargohold expanders can have about 164 thousand ehp.

It takes about 25 catalysts, at a cost of 250m isk and 10 talos at a cost of about a billion isk to safely gank a hull tanked obelisk.

It takes about 11 catalysts, at a cost of 110m isk and 5 talos at a cost of about 500m isk to safely gank a non-tanked Charon.

Pick the right ship. Fit it correctly. By flying a Charon you reduce the minimum requirement in manpower and capital while simultaneously increasing the profit margin per character involved in the gank.

Don't be lazy, don't be stupid. Web your own freighter. Avoid .5 and .6 systems. Don't autopilot. Don't carry too much in one trip. Make a watch list. Use locator agents on known gankers. Scout routes. Bring logi. Bring ecm. Bring friends. Pay for new friends. Counter-bump. Gank the bumper. Gank the gankers. Buy a permit. Pay a ransom. Use a different ship. There are so many things you can do to protect yourself and only a few you can do wrong. Far and by the worst thing that you can do, though, is to do nothing to protect yourself. DO SOMETHING. Use the game mechanics to your advantage.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2014-09-02 18:16:45 UTC
THCS wrote:
Name says it. Haulers should have significantly more tank to discourage successful suicide ganks. More tank = More leveraged isk needed to gank.

IMO the leveraged isk need to gank should at least be 80% the value of the hull for t1 freighters and 60% for t2 j-freighters.

Is this argument special to freighters? or should we start applying it elsewhere in game aspects as well?

(Hint: No)
Joraa Starkmanir
Station Spinners United
#4 - 2014-09-02 18:32:30 UTC
Rowells wrote:
THCS wrote:
Name says it. Haulers should have significantly more tank to discourage successful suicide ganks. More tank = More leveraged isk needed to gank.

IMO the leveraged isk need to gank should at least be 80% the value of the hull for t1 freighters and 60% for t2 j-freighters.

Is this argument special to freighters? or should we start applying it elsewhere in game aspects as well?

(Hint: No)


Actualy that would not be to bad, considering we are talking about hull cost for a t1 ship. Costing 110k to suicide gank a freighter that cost close to 1.3b or more (less than 10% of hull cost)

A tanked Obelist cost 250m to safely gank, or 1/3 of the hull cost. What other T1 ships have that ratio? tanked or untanked.
Most T1 battleships can easily get a higher EHP than a cargo fit Charon, and would assume they all have better EHP/isk than the best tanked freighters.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#5 - 2014-09-02 19:05:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:
Rowells wrote:
THCS wrote:
Name says it. Haulers should have significantly more tank to discourage successful suicide ganks. More tank = More leveraged isk needed to gank.

IMO the leveraged isk need to gank should at least be 80% the value of the hull for t1 freighters and 60% for t2 j-freighters.

Is this argument special to freighters? or should we start applying it elsewhere in game aspects as well?

(Hint: No)


Actualy that would not be to bad, considering we are talking about hull cost for a t1 ship. Costing 110m to suicide gank a freighter that cost close to 1.3b or more (less than 10% of hull cost)

A tanked Obelist cost 250m to safely gank, or 1/3 of the hull cost. What other T1 ships have that ratio? tanked or untanked.
Most T1 battleships can easily get a higher EHP than a cargo fit Charon, and would assume they all have better EHP/isk than the best tanked freighters.


Lots of ships can be ganked cheaply, below your 10% of t1 hull cost criteria.

An untanked covetor (30m) can be suicide ganked by a single low meta fit catalyst (<2.5m).

An untanked Talos (60m) can be suicide ganked by 2 low meta fit catalysts (< 5m in total). If it is tanked, it will take 3-4 low meta catalysts to kill the Talos (< 10m).

A Cargo Fit Apoc (160m) has only 25k EHP, which could be ganked by 3-4 low meta catalysts (<10m isk total)

Lots of ships can be ganked by a few low-cost ships. The question is, how many pilots put themselves in such a situation.

It has only been a couple months since they gave freighters low slots! That change allowed freighters to fit bulkheads and significantly increase their EHP. Fitting cargo expanded, nanofibers, and i-stabs rather than bulkheads to a freighter is a pilot choice, and it makes them easier to kill.

This leaves us with a reasonable decision to make: Do you fit a max cargo capacity freighter, taking more stuff at once, while simultaneously being much easier to gank. Or do you fit a max tank fit freighter, which is much more expensive to gank but limited in its cargo capacity and slower than it potentially could be?

Having choices like this is good for the game. Players constantly make similar choices when running missions (tank vs dps), when doing incursions (tank vs dps), when mining (tank vs yield), when PvPing, and more. I personally find the balance points pretty reasonable at the moment, but perhaps your personal experiences are different. Can you explain what is out of balance?
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#6 - 2014-09-02 19:15:45 UTC
See my sig for CCP's stance on suicide ganking.

(TL;DR version, bring bigger guns to protect your stuff, hisec isn't safe.)

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#7 - 2014-09-02 19:18:41 UTC
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:
Rowells wrote:
THCS wrote:
Name says it. Haulers should have significantly more tank to discourage successful suicide ganks. More tank = More leveraged isk needed to gank.

IMO the leveraged isk need to gank should at least be 80% the value of the hull for t1 freighters and 60% for t2 j-freighters.

Is this argument special to freighters? or should we start applying it elsewhere in game aspects as well?

(Hint: No)


Actualy that would not be to bad, considering we are talking about hull cost for a t1 ship. Costing 110k to suicide gank a freighter that cost close to 1.3b or more (less than 10% of hull cost)

A tanked Obelist cost 250m to safely gank, or 1/3 of the hull cost. What other T1 ships have that ratio? tanked or untanked.
Most T1 battleships can easily get a higher EHP than a cargo fit Charon, and would assume they all have better EHP/isk than the best tanked freighters.

This is isk balancing. and isk balancing is bad. Shoul we also buff the HP of my prowler since a T1 cruiser at a fraction of the cost is capable of killing it before concord arrives? The only way cost is a balancing factor is by comparing its effectiveness to other similar type ships.

What will most likely happen is not that gankers will stop ganking because targets are tougher, they will simply wait as everyone realizes they can stuff more into their cargo holds. Then the ganking goes on as usual and we come back here wanting more buffs.

You already got low slots to give you an option to get more tank than you could before. Was that not enough? shall we continue to buff freighters continously until gankers cant keep up?

Cost reflects more than just how hard something is to kill.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#8 - 2014-09-02 19:22:26 UTC
So let me get this straight.

I read somewhere or other that after freighters got lowslots they became significantly easier to kill - even when fitted with bulkheads to increase the EHP.

Is it true that even EHP-fitted freighters are weaker than the previous no-slot versions, or was I reading wild and delirious claims made by someone who was probably a bit too drugged out on ... well ... drugs?
Absolutely Not Analt
Carebears on Fire
Viral Society
#9 - 2014-09-02 19:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Absolutely Not Analt
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
So let me get this straight.

I read somewhere or other that after freighters got lowslots they became significantly easier to kill - even when fitted with bulkheads to increase the EHP.

Is it true that even EHP-fitted freighters are weaker than the previous no-slot versions, or was I reading wild and delirious claims made by someone who was probably a bit too drugged out on ... well ... drugs?


A freighter fitted out with three t2 bulkheads is significantly harder to kill than the previous iteration. They have almost 100k more EHP. Jump freighters jumped up even more (my alt's Rhea has nearly 600500k EHP with three bulkheads on it).

The problem is people don't fit them with bulkheads. Because of :balance:, the cargo capacity was reduced pretty significantly, and people keep fitting them with cargo expanders to get back to the old max cargo room value. The problem is that cargo expanders actually reduce your hull hp, which is where the freighter stores most of its EHP.

We did warn the "freighters need slots" crowd, but they kept whining and CCP gave them what they asked for.

So no, freighters, properly fit, are actually harder to kill than they used to be. But if you fit it like a tissue paper pinata, it will pop like one.

From the rate these threads keep popping up, I'd say another freighter nerf is probably heading our way through. Thanks a lot.Roll

Edit: Had the EHP values on the Rhea off.

Eve is a multi player game. And you are the content. - Ralph King-Griffin Being meh at two things is not better than being great at one. - Lugh Crow-Slave

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#10 - 2014-09-02 20:00:19 UTC
Regardless of how much EHP you put on a freighter, so long the gankers keep it bumped, it will die eventually.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Clementina
Coreli Corporation
#11 - 2014-09-02 20:26:51 UTC
Bullet Therapist has already answered the question of everyone who wants more EHP on their gankable freighter. Read these words of wisdom.

Bullet Therapist wrote:
It takes about 25 catalysts, at a cost of 250m isk and 10 talos at a cost of about a billion isk to safely gank a hull tanked obelisk.

It takes about 11 catalysts, at a cost of 110m isk and 5 talos at a cost of about 500m isk to safely gank a non-tanked Charon.

Pick the right ship. Fit it correctly. By flying a Charon you reduce the minimum requirement in manpower and capital while simultaneously increasing the profit margin per character involved in the gank.


I'll just elaborate a little. If you have enemies who are able to get 11 people together and spend 110 million isk to screw with you then it is in your interests to give them something harder to bite down on than a freighter with a full rack of cargo expander II's flying AFK through a 0.5 on the Jita -> Amarr route.
And just to be sure, if your freighter is heavy-laden with expensive merchandise, then you have such enemies.
Joraa Starkmanir
Station Spinners United
#12 - 2014-09-02 22:14:21 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


Lots of ships can be ganked cheaply, below your 10% of t1 hull cost criteria.

An untanked covetor (30m) can be suicide ganked by a single low meta fit catalyst (<2.5m).

An untanked Talos (60m) can be suicide ganked by 2 low meta fit catalysts (< 5m in total). If it is tanked, it will take 3-4 low meta catalysts to kill the Talos (< 10m).

A Cargo Fit Apoc (160m) has only 25k EHP, which could be ganked by 3-4 low meta catalysts (<10m isk total)

Lots of ships can be ganked by a few low-cost ships. The question is, how many pilots put themselves in such a situation.

It has only been a couple months since they gave freighters low slots! That change allowed freighters to fit bulkheads and significantly increase their EHP. Fitting cargo expanded, nanofibers, and i-stabs rather than bulkheads to a freighter is a pilot choice, and it makes them easier to kill.

This leaves us with a reasonable decision to make: Do you fit a max cargo capacity freighter, taking more stuff at once, while simultaneously being much easier to gank. Or do you fit a max tank fit freighter, which is much more expensive to gank but limited in its cargo capacity and slower than it potentially could be?

Having choices like this is good for the game. Players constantly make similar choices when running missions (tank vs dps), when doing incursions (tank vs dps), when mining (tank vs yield), when PvPing, and more. I personally find the balance points pretty reasonable at the moment, but perhaps your personal experiences are different. Can you explain what is out of balance?


Ok I jumped the gun a little there for untanked ships, still stand on tanked ships tho. Using cheaper catalysts than in the other scenario would mean total price to gank freighters with thos ewould also be cheaper total (10m vs 2.5m). You estimate 6,5-8,33k dmg per cata for >2.5m some thing that equal around 60m to gang an untanked Charon or a ratio of 21:1 for isk (charon hull:isk to gank). This is using the numbers from Buller Therapist @ 15k dmg/10m cost and comparing to your numers from cargo fit Apoc (25k EHP 3-4cata @ <10m total)

Untanked Covetor 30m vs <2.5m catalyst
Untanked Talos 60m vs <5m catalysts
Cargo fit Apoc 160m vs <10m catalysts
Cargo fit Charon 1300m vs 60m catalysts

If we up those numbers to match for ganking cost we get,
24x untanked Covetor = 720m (cost 60m to gank)
12x untanked Talos = 720m (60m to gank)
6x cargo fit Apoc = 960m (60m to gank)
1x cargo fit Charon = 1300m (60m to gank)


Was actualy expecting to get ALOT closer than this for cargo fit freighter, but WORST case scenario show us that freighters simply have to little EHP for their cost. Sure you would need 24 pilots to kill a cargo fir Charon with whatever fit this is, but you also just need 120m isk in cargo before a freighter gank is likely to break even (estimate 50% drop).
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#13 - 2014-09-02 22:23:17 UTC
Alternative idea: you try to actually use your brain, and use the numerous methods of avoiding getting ganked without whining to CCP to prop-up your laziness with buffs.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#14 - 2014-09-02 23:54:05 UTC
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


Lots of ships can be ganked cheaply, below your 10% of t1 hull cost criteria.

An untanked covetor (30m) can be suicide ganked by a single low meta fit catalyst (<2.5m).

An untanked Talos (60m) can be suicide ganked by 2 low meta fit catalysts (< 5m in total). If it is tanked, it will take 3-4 low meta catalysts to kill the Talos (< 10m).

A Cargo Fit Apoc (160m) has only 25k EHP, which could be ganked by 3-4 low meta catalysts (<10m isk total)

Lots of ships can be ganked by a few low-cost ships. The question is, how many pilots put themselves in such a situation.

It has only been a couple months since they gave freighters low slots! That change allowed freighters to fit bulkheads and significantly increase their EHP. Fitting cargo expanded, nanofibers, and i-stabs rather than bulkheads to a freighter is a pilot choice, and it makes them easier to kill.

This leaves us with a reasonable decision to make: Do you fit a max cargo capacity freighter, taking more stuff at once, while simultaneously being much easier to gank. Or do you fit a max tank fit freighter, which is much more expensive to gank but limited in its cargo capacity and slower than it potentially could be?

Having choices like this is good for the game. Players constantly make similar choices when running missions (tank vs dps), when doing incursions (tank vs dps), when mining (tank vs yield), when PvPing, and more. I personally find the balance points pretty reasonable at the moment, but perhaps your personal experiences are different. Can you explain what is out of balance?


Ok I jumped the gun a little there for untanked ships, still stand on tanked ships tho. Using cheaper catalysts than in the other scenario would mean total price to gank freighters with thos ewould also be cheaper total (10m vs 2.5m). You estimate 6,5-8,33k dmg per cata for >2.5m some thing that equal around 60m to gang an untanked Charon or a ratio of 21:1 for isk (charon hull:isk to gank). This is using the numbers from Buller Therapist @ 15k dmg/10m cost and comparing to your numers from cargo fit Apoc (25k EHP 3-4cata @ <10m total)

Untanked Covetor 30m vs <2.5m catalyst
Untanked Talos 60m vs <5m catalysts
Cargo fit Apoc 160m vs <10m catalysts
Cargo fit Charon 1300m vs 60m catalysts

If we up those numbers to match for ganking cost we get,
24x untanked Covetor = 720m (cost 60m to gank)
12x untanked Talos = 720m (60m to gank)
6x cargo fit Apoc = 960m (60m to gank)
1x cargo fit Charon = 1300m (60m to gank)


Was actualy expecting to get ALOT closer than this for cargo fit freighter, but WORST case scenario show us that freighters simply have to little EHP for their cost. Sure you would need 24 pilots to kill a cargo fir Charon with whatever fit this is, but you also just need 120m isk in cargo before a freighter gank is likely to break even (estimate 50% drop).


You are ignoring the time component. Think how much time those 24 pilots have to spend for their profits. If they get 1 freighter an hour, and each pilot wishes to make 20m isk for an hour of their time, you need those freighters to carry 1b isk in loot above the 120m isk gank cost to make it worth their time.

Furthermore, you are basing all of your numbers on the absolute cheapest gank ships (low meta catalysts). It is much more common to see a few battlecruisers (Talos / Brutix) on these assaults too. While they are less efficient damage / isk, they reduce the number of pilots needed to gank a ship, which is often far more reasonable.

Code in particular have been "claiming" high sec systems and demanding people buy permits to play there. That is excellent content, and I see no reason to stick it to them for successfully organizing ganks. There are still plenty of ways to circumvent them: Web-to-warp, Jump Logistics, defense fleets, or even freighting services (i.e. pay someone else to take on the risk of moving your stuff).

I know people that ran tons of freight trips in and out of Jita during burn jita and made quite a bit of isk doing it. IMHO, it is 100% acceptable for CODE or Goons or .... to shut down the major trade lanes through Niarja and/or Uedema. It makes the local major hubs more independent from Jita, and adds an extra element to game play that we all need to focus on.

Why is this a bad thing?


ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#15 - 2014-09-03 01:04:17 UTC
It's quite easy to get any freighter over 250k EHP.

That said, thread locked.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)