These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

need for 400,000 m3 general hauler.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2015-09-04 06:03:19 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
a hauler with 400,000 m3 cargo capacity

Fenrir has 435,000m3 cargohold.




We definitely need light freighters, but your numbers are too high. Large industrials haul up to almost 40,000m3; Deep Space Transports haul up to almost 70,000m3 without being cargo fit. Fenrir, the next in line, hauls at minimum 435,000m3 (456,750m3 at skill 1). We need something with a base cargohold of around 100,000m3, which when fit with 3 cargohold expanders will still be under 300,000m3. That's how you justify giving it better agility than large freighters, it needs to haul a lot less. Otherwise it's worthless.


Helia Tranquilis wrote:
inb4 Orca and this has been suggested several times

At least that's what's been taught to say. 100k m3 + 40k m3 fleet hangar when anti-tanked. It and T2 haulers must do. Never ask for new ships. Adapt and always use Redfrog.

Every time this is suggested, it takes about 5 minutes before some loon, in their infinite wisdom, has the gall to suggest that the Orca is a functional light freighter. Leaving aside the price and training implications, it has absolutely none of the benefits over a full-size freighter that a light freighter would have.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#22 - 2015-09-04 06:33:51 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
a hauler with 400,000 m3 cargo capacity

Fenrir has 435,000m3 cargohold.




We definitely need light freighters, but your numbers are too high. Large industrials haul up to almost 40,000m3; Deep Space Transports haul up to almost 70,000m3 without being cargo fit. Fenrir, the next in line, hauls at minimum 435,000m3 (456,750m3 at skill 1). We need something with a base cargohold of around 100,000m3, which when fit with 3 cargohold expanders will still be under 300,000m3. That's how you justify giving it better agility than large freighters, it needs to haul a lot less. Otherwise it's worthless.


Helia Tranquilis wrote:
inb4 Orca and this has been suggested several times

At least that's what's been taught to say. 100k m3 + 40k m3 fleet hangar when anti-tanked. It and T2 haulers must do. Never ask for new ships. Adapt and always use Redfrog.


Every time this is suggested, it takes about 5 minutes before some loon, in their infinite wisdom, has the gall to suggest that the Orca is a functional light freighter. Leaving aside the price and training implications, it has absolutely none of the benefits over a full-size freighter that a light freighter would have.


I realized i should not have used the max fit capacity in my discussion. The 400,000 would be the modded and rigged max capacity of the Caldari variant. the 400,000 baby freighter would carry about 1/3 the capacity of the Charon, comparing the Caldari variants.

Thus it could be about one-third the size of the charon with accompanying appropriate stat profile.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#23 - 2015-09-04 06:54:46 UTC
I have never understood the mindset of players who immediately come back with "x is not needed, you can already so something similar if you shoehorn Y"

New Eden has a problem. There is a class of criminal that cannot be contained. They like to blow up freighters. Industries everywhere would start working on solutions. One of those would certainly be faster ships that could avoid these criminals.

Also... Anyone who can't see that there is room in the hauling line up between industrials and freighters is working an angle. Fuel isn't the only efficiency station to be considered. Like all else in EVE but an ship under an active cloak, these things will be shot down for the where hell of it. A range of options from the pocket change of an industrial to the 1+ billion of freighters should certainly exist in this sort of environment. I mean come on, the base stats jump from around 4k to 400k m3 between the two classes. At the very least a base t1 line in the 40k area seems reasonable, and probably one that splits the difference at a base of around 200k as well.

To save brain sweat it could be introduced as an Interbus series of faction ships, with a few hulls based on role: speed, capacity, security. Similar to the ORE ships we could have the base models as the 40k variety, and t2 as the 200k variety.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#24 - 2015-09-04 06:58:18 UTC
I would have absolutely no use for such a ship, but that does not mean it is a bad idea. While a big part of me just wants to say, "Use a Freighter," that is one ship I have no interest in flying or even owning. The slow warp speed and slow align, plus the need to babysit it at all times is just a complete pain. So, I could support a smaller class of Freighter with an absolute max of 400k m3 capacity (if fitted for capacity) and half the align time of a Freighter (if fitted for agility).

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#25 - 2015-09-04 08:15:17 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
5. The MWD trick isnt a legitimate ship statistic it is a player contrived use of game mechanics

It may have been player contrived (I don't know) but it used to be listed on the tips page on the old eve-o... back in 2005...
If it was an unintended mechanic then it falls into the same category as jet-can mining; fully embraced by CCP.

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
I realized i should not have used the max fit capacity in my discussion. The 400,000 would be the modded and rigged max capacity of the Caldari variant.

Regardless, it's too large.
As has already been stated the current freighters aren't significantly bigger (Fenrir <10% larger) so the capacity you're discussing is seems to obsolete them. 250,000m3 fully expanded is about the limit I could consider...
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#26 - 2015-09-04 09:20:17 UTC
Jacob Holland wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
]I realized i should not have used the max fit capacity in my discussion. The 400,000 would be the modded and rigged max capacity of the Caldari variant.

Regardless, it's too large.
As has already been stated the current freighters aren't significantly bigger (Fenrir <10% larger) so the capacity you're discussing is seems to obsolete them. 250,000m3 fully expanded is about the limit I could consider...


Why would having the top end of the smaller freighters being close to the unenhanced base of the larger freighter be so out of line? It's not making the larger one obsolete except in edge cases where the larger one would be fit for maximum survivability and still be underloaded. That circumstance is part of the reason the baby freighter is desired in the first place.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#27 - 2015-09-04 09:36:29 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
New Eden has a problem. There is a class of criminal that cannot be contained. They like to blow up freighters. Industries everywhere would start working on solutions. One of those would certainly be faster ships that could avoid these criminals.


First of all, that's an opporunity, not a problem.

Secondly, when was the last time you had as many people in your freighter fleet as the gankers had in theirs and still wound up with a freighter lossmail? Hell, you only need two people to move a freighter and you're 99.9% immune to gankers, just so long as the second guy is flying a rapier with dual webs. Make the third guy an interceptor pilot and you've got redundancy in the event of you being the 0.1%.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Luscius Uta
#28 - 2015-09-04 10:00:42 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


We definitely need light freighters, but your numbers are too high. Large industrials haul up to almost 40,000m3; Deep Space Transports haul up to almost 70,000m3 without being cargo fit. Fenrir, the next in line, hauls at minimum 435,000m3 (456,750m3 at skill 1). We need something with a base cargohold of around 100,000m3, which when fit with 3 cargohold expanders will still be under 300,000m3. That's how you justify giving it better agility than large freighters, it needs to haul a lot less. Otherwise it's worthless.


^^ This.
There were so many times when I had to haul between 100k and 200k m^3, making it too much to fit in an Orca or DST, but to little to make it worth using a Freighter.
I would also add that it should be rather crucial for those "light" Freighters to have much shorter train than "standard" Freighters (no Advanced Spaceship Command V please). That would make them very popular ships.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2015-09-04 10:28:23 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
I would also add that it should be rather crucial for those "light" Freighters to have much shorter train than "standard" Freighters (no Advanced Spaceship Command V please). That would make them very popular ships.

Part of me feels they should simply use the same skills as the big freighters. I think both should only require Advanced Spaceship Command 4 or less anyway, they don't do much. For being a capital ship, all you're actually paying for is a big hull. It shouldn't be significantly more difficult to train for than a transport which actually does have special functions.



Alternatively: make freighter skills require ASC 1 or something, and make large freighters carry an additional skill requirement of ASC 5.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Tappits
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#30 - 2015-09-04 11:31:16 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

No, actually the align time difference and the warp speed difference would be substantial between this and my suggestion, since i basically created a hauler roughly half the size if the freighter class.


Well that's not how eve works, just because it can haul half the amount/half the size does not mean its 2x the speed.


A blank Occator can move 66,400 m3 and has a stock align time of 17.8s with max skills.
A blank Fenrir can move 543,750 m3 and has a stock align time of 36s with max skils
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#31 - 2015-09-04 12:13:15 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
New Eden has a problem. There is a class of criminal that cannot be contained. They like to blow up freighters. Industries everywhere would start working on solutions. One of those would certainly be faster ships that could avoid these criminals.


First of all, that's an opporunity, not a problem.

Secondly, when was the last time you had as many people in your freighter fleet as the gankers had in theirs and still wound up with a freighter lossmail? Hell, you only need two people to move a freighter and you're 99.9% immune to gankers, just so long as the second guy is flying a rapier with dual webs. Make the third guy an interceptor pilot and you've got redundancy in the event of you being the 0.1%.



Well... Um... Yar, and stuff. It's not all about you brother. I wasn't really talking about ganks as much as I was that with the situation being what it is, someone would build a more appropriate platform for shipping that didn't either cost a billion ISK, or else held more than a thimble. We have pickups, we have cargo ships... we kinda need some semi-tractor trailers, maybe some 5th wheel heavy duty trucks, and who knows but some mid range box trucks as well.

This is not a new idea, there were numerous threads on this on the original forums. People have been begging for this for years. The T2 industrials do not really fill the need, and the Orca is a fine ship but it's not really in the line nor filling the need either.
Luscius Uta
#32 - 2015-09-04 12:41:10 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:




Alternatively: make freighter skills require ASC 1 or something, and make large freighters carry an additional skill requirement of ASC 5.



Which sounds just about right since it cuts the training time by some 20 days.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Anthar Thebess
#33 - 2015-09-04 13:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Tbh i think that this game is missing armored transport ship.

ORE could come with some plans for a armored version of a hauler that can bite.

100k of fleet hangar ( better to balance cargo space this way)
EDIT : 35k of ship maintenance bay , just to keep this interesting Pirate
10k of cargo space
6 highslots
4 medslots
4 lowslots

20mb bandwidth /100 m3 drone space

Capable of mounting large guns , still no bonuses to any offensive weapon , but local rep bonus, and maybe even ability to mount links - without providing bonus from hull.

So ship that can do a lot of different things , but it is not good at any of them.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#34 - 2015-09-04 15:17:08 UTC
I think a few ships that offered cargo capacity in the 50k-100k range would probably have a large appeal.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#35 - 2015-09-04 15:22:50 UTC
This thread is a bad example of humankinds potential to imagine dumb things.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2015-09-04 23:00:55 UTC
The light freighter could be designed much like a bigger industrial, with lots of slots and powergrid, and just 75,000-125,000m3 base carry amount but a lot of room to expand. In order to increase its utility and somewhat diminish the difference made by cargo expanders, it could include some of its carry amount as fleet hangar space, or in other specialized bays.

Here is an example:

Gallente Light Freighter
30,000m3 cargohold
60,000m3 fleet hangar
6 low slots, 3 mid slots

When fit for maximum tank: 90,000m3 total capacity
If you add one cargo expander: 98,250m3 total capacity (+9.17%)

When fit for maximum cargo (T1 rigs, T2 expanders): 256,008m3 total capacity
If you subtract one cargo expander: 213,732m3 total capacity (-16.5%)




Furthermore it could have more high slots than industrials, with the ability to fit some weapons although not enough to compete with combat ships. These should also have decent drone bays/bandwidth for defense. They could certainly be used as a combat ship but it wouldn't be ideal by any stretch.

4 high slots, 3 turret hardpoints
1500m3 drone bay, 50mbit/sec bandwidth
3 mid slots, 6 low slots

3750MW powergrid, 400 Tf CPU

3000 shield hit points, 1500s shield recharge time
7500 armor hit points
12,500 hull hit points

Signature radius: 1250m
Max velocity: 85m/s
Warp velocity: 1.8 AU/s

Mass: 235,000,000 kg
Agility modifier: 0.168
Base Align Time: 54.3s
Max Skill Align Time: 27.5s
Align time w/ max skills and 3x T2 inertial stabilizers: 16.1s


Gallente Freighter skill bonus:
5% bonus to ship velocity per level
5% bonus to ship cargo and fleet hangar capacity per level

After calculating for max skill:
When fit for maximum tank: 112,500m3 total capacity
If you add one cargo expander: 122,812.5m3 total capacity (+9.17%)

When fit for maximum cargo (T1 rigs, T2 expanders): 320,011m3 total capacity
If you subtract one cargo expander: 267,165m3 total capacity (-16.5%)




This ship would be able to fit some battleship turrets if it selected some with cheap fittings, alternatively it could easily fit medium turrets. It could use both a large armor repairer and a 1600mm armor plate. It can carry a lot of backup drones or even use the drone bay as a small amount of extra hauling space, and it can launch a full complement of unbonused medium drones.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#37 - 2015-09-05 00:30:52 UTC
Jacob Holland wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
5. The MWD trick isnt a legitimate ship statistic it is a player contrived use of game mechanics

It may have been player contrived (I don't know) but it used to be listed on the tips page on the old eve-o... back in 2005...
If it was an unintended mechanic then it falls into the same category as jet-can mining; fully embraced by CCP.


I didnt mean to imply it was an exploit, i meant it cannot be used as a ship balancing statistic because if we start balancing ships around things people do with it that were never intended, it would become impossible to balance ships.

Jacob Holland wrote:

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
I realized i should not have used the max fit capacity in my discussion. The 400,000 would be the modded and rigged max capacity of the Caldari variant.

Regardless, it's too large.
As has already been stated the current freighters aren't significantly bigger (Fenrir <10% larger) so the capacity you're discussing is seems to obsolete them. 250,000m3 fully expanded is about the limit I could consider...


You are comparing a fully expanded, and rigged ship to any unmodded and barely trained into freighter. This isnt really a fair comparison. To be fair you would need a fully trained pilot in each with all possible rigs and mods in place. When you do that you find, using the Charon and the new Baby Charon as examples....

Charon: maxed is 1.2 million+ m3 of capacity.

Baby Charon: maxed 400,000 m3 capacity (i mentioned before this is a fully skilled pilot, rigged and modded for capacity and the Caldari variant of the baby freighters so this is the absolute maximum that any of the baby freighters could carry)

The baby freighter is carrying only 1/3 the capacity of the Charon, this is hardly, 'stepping on its toes'.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#38 - 2015-09-05 00:53:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Tappits wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

No, actually the align time difference and the warp speed difference would be substantial between this and my suggestion, since i basically created a hauler roughly half the size if the freighter class.


Well that's not how eve works, just because it can haul half the amount/half the size does not mean its 2x the speed.


A blank Occator can move 66,400 m3 and has a stock align time of 17.8s with max skills.
A blank Fenrir can move 543,750 m3 and has a stock align time of 36s with max skils


I was actually wrong, the baby freighters will only be 1/3 the size of their bigger brothers. The stats of the baby freighters would not be pushing close to the freighters because freighters are capital class ships and their stats in every way reflect that including things like: mass, align times, and EHPs.

The baby freighter would be a sub-cap and wouldnt suffer the penalties associated with being a capital class ship nor gain the benefits.

The proper stats for the baby freighter would have to be derived not from the Occator (since it isnt a dedicated hauler, even CCPs description of the ship makes this clear it serves two masters hauling AND being tough). The ships to compare to the new baby hauler would be like the sigil and bestower since they are dedicated haulers that serve only one master that being capacity, you can make them tough if you wish but at the expense of hauling which is a dedicated haulers one true calling.

As to balancing in general the devs can work out the numbers but when they do it should turn out that this baby freighter would best a freighter for loads in the 150k to 400k range but lose in the 400k+ range since none of them could even carry that much stuff.

On the otherhand the baby freighters should lose by a considerable margin when they start carrying loads that should be hauled; for instance, in a Bestower.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#39 - 2015-09-05 00:57:29 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The light freighter could be designed much like a bigger industrial, with lots of slots and powergrid, and just 75,000-125,000m3 base carry amount but a lot of room to expand. In order to increase its utility and somewhat diminish the difference made by cargo expanders, it could include some of its carry amount as fleet hangar space, or in other specialized bays.

Here is an example:

Gallente Light Freighter
30,000m3 cargohold
60,000m3 fleet hangar
6 low slots, 3 mid slots

When fit for maximum tank: 90,000m3 total capacity
If you add one cargo expander: 98,250m3 total capacity (+9.17%)

When fit for maximum cargo (T1 rigs, T2 expanders): 256,008m3 total capacity
If you subtract one cargo expander: 213,732m3 total capacity (-16.5%)




Furthermore it could have more high slots than industrials, with the ability to fit some weapons although not enough to compete with combat ships. These should also have decent drone bays/bandwidth for defense. They could certainly be used as a combat ship but it wouldn't be ideal by any stretch.

4 high slots, 3 turret hardpoints
1500m3 drone bay, 50mbit/sec bandwidth
3 mid slots, 6 low slots

3750MW powergrid, 400 Tf CPU

3000 shield hit points, 1500s shield recharge time
7500 armor hit points
12,500 hull hit points

Signature radius: 1250m
Max velocity: 85m/s
Warp velocity: 1.8 AU/s

Mass: 235,000,000 kg
Agility modifier: 0.168
Base Align Time: 54.3s
Max Skill Align Time: 27.5s
Align time w/ max skills and 3x T2 inertial stabilizers: 16.1s


Gallente Freighter skill bonus:
5% bonus to ship velocity per level
5% bonus to ship cargo and fleet hangar capacity per level

After calculating for max skill:
When fit for maximum tank: 112,500m3 total capacity
If you add one cargo expander: 122,812.5m3 total capacity (+9.17%)

When fit for maximum cargo (T1 rigs, T2 expanders): 320,011m3 total capacity
If you subtract one cargo expander: 267,165m3 total capacity (-16.5%)




This ship would be able to fit some battleship turrets if it selected some with cheap fittings, alternatively it could easily fit medium turrets. It could use both a large armor repairer and a 1600mm armor plate. It can carry a lot of backup drones or even use the drone bay as a small amount of extra hauling space, and it can launch a full complement of unbonused medium drones.


This thread isnt about anything except a new mid-sized, as someone called them baby freighters, that are dedicated to just one thing, carrying capacity. It could be used for other things since it will have rigs and mod slots but that isnt what its being designed to do.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#40 - 2015-09-05 00:59:15 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I think a few ships that offered cargo capacity in the 50k-100k range would probably have a large appeal.


Those numbers are okay, but they seem exceedingly close to the smaller haulers so im not supporting a class of this size.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.