Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Industrials/Transports/Exhumers/Freighters are non-combat ships. Although they can be fitted (except for freighters which cant be fitted with anything) with guns, they are not designed for combat.

Proposal: Treat these ship types as a separate non-combat class capable of holding mods made only for their class. Introducing high powered, anti-webbing, anti-warpscramble, anti-cargoscan, anti-lock on mods.

These mods would have to be of higher caliber than those available to all other ship types. If other combat-type ships choose to use them they come at a high power-grid/capacitor price for them (much like certain cloak mods do already).

I would also like to see some ingenuity in new mods.

1. Micro warp jump: an emergency feature that will "micro-jump" you 100m in some random direction. It will allow you to disappear and reappear buying you some time to get away from a gang The risk is that it may jump you closer to them since it's random. Comes with a 30 sec cooldown before it can be used again.

2. Pre-jump gate scanner: a glimpse at what waits for you on the other side of a gate. It would be an anti-gate camp feature. Licensed for use only in low/null sec. Inoperable in hi-sec.

3. Auto warp-to-gate compressor mod: something like auto-WTZ but not quite. Available only to freighters and non-cloak enabled transports and exhumers. Different Tech level mods that allow for a closer jump to a gate without coming to full WTZ ability.

4. Anti-cargo scan mod: Remove the temptation by blinding them to your cargo.

5. Doomsday self destruct: This is my favorite and it comes at a high price. It's basically a smartbomb on steroids. This mod will destroy your ship, your pod (you will be podding yourself) as well as all ships currently targeting you (without podding them) within a 100m range. It would only affect targeting ships so it's more akin to a smart grenade. Licensed only for use in low/null sec (like bubbles). Inoperable in high-sec. The self-podding price will hopefully prevent abuse of this mod but if you are in defenseless freighter and you are going to go down, may as well take the attackers with you.

The exact details on how to properly balance these ideas out would be up to CCP to decide. I am just presenting the ideas.

So I present these ideas and features for CCP, and for all the griefers that feel this would change the game too much against them, let me just say....HTFU!!!

These features would balance carebears with non-carebears.

All suggestions/adjustments/ideas to this proposal are welcomed.

EDIT: The "100m" figures given above are not absolute just a suggestion to open up discussion on what would be a proper numeric figure. Obviously 100m is too small and 100km too large for the suggested ideas.

I agree. The numbers will have to be fudged to make it balanced.

1. If you CBA to D-scan every so often (10 sec even) you deserve what you're getting. Furthermore, 100m isn't exactly "far" by any means (as noted by Rothgar).
2. get a scout. Said scout works in hi/low/null perfectly (i.e. you can still get ganked at a gatecamp in highsec)
3. WTZ works wonders. Auto-pilot works fine as it is right now.
4. OK, this seems workable -- TBH, it does seem a little backwards that there is no "smuggling hold" (module/whatever) for this purpose.
5. other than the fact you're mistaken about bubbles (they're NS only), this would not be workable due to 100m being (again) a laughably short distance in EVE.

1. 100m hop? How is this helpful? Even the smallest ships are over 50m in length.
1 (counter proposal), decoy launcher to disrupt targetting and webbed for X number of seconds (20?) Modified down by attackers scan resolution.

2. This is something that is needed in my opinion. The 'get a scout' argument is a very tired one. However I think all that should be reported is the number of ships, not cloaked, within 50km of the gate on the other side within the last five minutes. Not what kind, not who they are, nothing, just a head count. Some will argue that it'll kill gate camping, but not really. The short range just give a 'help' to the incoming pilot is all it is, the DPS folks just need to hold outside the sensor radius to avoid warning their prey. Some will argue that you'll kill PVP, but a lot of people avoid going 'out there' because they don't want to fly in to a situation where they stand no chance at all of at least a minor hope to escape. Give them some hope and more will go out there.

3. What needs to be fixed is the WTZ bouncing off the gate crap for big ships. Otherwise it should stay as it is.

4. A smuggling hold is needed. It uses up a certain amount of cargo space, is fitted as a module, and has ridiculous fitting numbers so that only ships with bonuses can use them (like Strip Miners and Covert Ops Cloaks). The fact that you have one could be scanned, but the contents could not. Say it converts 1000m3 of cargo in to 100m3 of smuggling space. Low slot item.

5. I'm fine with fragging your pod, your cargo, and your ship. Otherwise the rest is bull as it would just be turned in to a new type of gank weapon.

Freighters can move armies, in this instance it is a strategic asset by allowing others to wage war as well as an economic asset in that they are large enough to disrupt local markets. You want to place it in the tactical arena.

the interesting thing about the post is the idea to divide the ships into combat vs. industrial ships, and this having an impact! right now ships are basically equal - as in having no really special traits (cov ops ok). mostly signature size, speed and alignment time decide if a ship (possibly an industrial) gets through, maybe EHP too.

you could argue that combat ships were designed /optimized to fight hostile forces - other combat ships. thus industrial ships basically abondoning all means to fight back could incorporate special means to evade a fight.

i feel the proposed suggestions alone would make the game very much unbalanced, but several special traits could be made available if there was a counter to it. e.g. a new combat ship class with a role specialized to deal with enforcing a blockade - stop industrials getting through. i think of blockade rather than simply "those ships can lock/kill industrials faster", e.g. only those ships alone could be noticeable from the other side of the gate providing a deterrant to jump.

this would add variety and roles in pvp, possibly also strengthening the economic side of eve. further dividing a conflict into armed forces and needed supply/logistics. more options and complexity. good. balancing would take months of discussion i think it has potential.

Listen nub. Play the game, or don't. You are asking for the game to unbalance in your favor. You cry because you don't think it is balanced. You know what the freighter has that other ships don't? Tons of cargo space. No combat ship in tha game can carry some things that a freighter can (ie. Ihubs). You know how many combat ships can mine aswell as a Hulk? None. You do realize T2 Haulers have bonuses to assist them in blockade running. So if you played the game longer than a second, you'd realize you have perks that combat ships don't. Ships have their purpose. You don't get to have a carebear wonderland with combat options. You get option 'A' or option 'B', that's how it works. If you can't hack it, play another game.

Stop being a pussy and play the game. Stop trying to unbalance it because your mad.

All 5 ideas are idiocy in their own way, but the others have neatly described how so I won't bother ripping on them one by one.
Instead I'll start on the rest of the OP's rampant stupidity:


No, these would make a decently fitted industrial unkillable.


They're bulk transport ships. Want to take one somewhere risky? Bring an escort fleet. Simple as that.


There's a difference between legitimate criticism and tears. Try learning what it is if you want to be taken remotely seriously.


If your pile of dribbling fail is ever implemented, there'll be no challenge or fight at all - carebears will be invincible.
Also the fact that off the top of my head I can think of two ways to massively abuse these modules for combat use.

But the biggest problem with this load of rubbish?
Counters to pirates already exist.
A properly fitted T1 industrial can traverse all but the most heavily camped lowsec with ease if the pilot has a clue. Then there are blockade runners and jump freighters, ships that are designed specificially for high-risk logistics and a role they excell at.

Nerfs and buffs are only required if there's no reasonable in-game way to deal with a problem. There are plenty of in-game ways to deal with this, and thus every hilariously OP idea in this thread is completely pointless.

Oh look, not a single valid counterpoint. What a surprise.

Prime example of how blurred the line between troll and simpleton is, I really can't tell in this case.

Heh, it always makes me laugh when carebears make threads like this, because they think the game is so imbalanced against them.

The thing is pirates are carebears too. In fact, when it comes to low sec, we probably do considerably more carebear activities than the guys making these posts. The difference is we know not to do stuff like jump freighters filled with our shiny stuff blindly through gates, and just get black frog to JF it for us instead.