These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Freighter Madness
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#121 - 2013-01-09 20:32:00 UTC
How much tech is used in jump freighters?
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#122 - 2013-01-09 20:58:17 UTC
Andski wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
So why you so against some help and having fitting options for Freighter pilots Andski?


Because freighters are not supposed to fit modules, were never meant to fit modules and were never meant to have any "fitting options" at all whatsoever, that's why.

As far as help, they can help themselves. It's time for CCP to stop coddling bad players who put their life's worth in a single freighter and, without even double-wrapping it, fly it AFK to Jita.

Stop demanding that CCP isolates you from other players and, for once, learn concepts like "double-wrapping" and "not going AFK"

Vyktor Abyss wrote:
The point is all the decision making is done by the ganker right now, the gankee doesn't have any decisions to make and cant feel clever (or then stupid) for fitting a hull tank, or a WCS for their trip through lowsec....etc The freighter EHP, concord and your DPS required are known so it is all rather simple.


This is nonsense and you know it. The freighter pilot has the choice to double-wrap and what to fly in a given haul. The fact that you want to do everything in EVE without risk, without thought and with maximum convenience in mind is representative of the problems with the entitled hisec playerbase.


So your argument is because freighters never had slots before they shouldn't now.... Thats genius. By similar logic the game should never change or improve.

and just a few things in reply to your numpty rage ASSUMPTIONS:

1. You're ASSUMING I'm a freighter pilot - I'm not; I have the skills and owned one in the past (no it never got ganked) but it is really dull and pointless having one unless moving huge volume of stuff around. I CBA with that and if I had to buy a freighter again I'd take the standard double-wrap precautions which are actually stupid work-arounds never intended for that purpose (Look I know CCP game design intentions too!).

2. You're ASSUMING that fitting options will make it harder to gank freighters, unprofitable or somehow NERF highsec ganking - It won't, it only offers some customisation and choice (requiring thought as you suggest) to freighter pilots - WHICH high volume hauling probably could do with to open up more 'roles' for freighters - ie a 'lowsec' one, or a more agile one etc etc... If freighters started showing up at mining ops it'd be a dream come true and you know it!

3. You ASSUME I'm risk adverse and am promoting that with my suggestion - You're wrong again. I'm a pvper and a pretty gung-ho one mate.

Your problem is you are completely blinkered in terms of what options it could add to the game. Stop the stubborn rage and get into a discussion rather than assuming you know it all and you are right. Cheers.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#123 - 2013-01-09 21:06:58 UTC
You're right. Freighters should be given 3 rig slots, 8 low slots, 8 mid slots and 8 high slots, 8 launcher and 8 turret hardpoints and infinite CPU, grid and calibration, just because they need ~improvement~ as if something is somehow wrong with them.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#124 - 2013-01-09 21:12:12 UTC
Andski wrote:
You're right. Freighters should be given 3 rig slots, 8 low slots, 8 mid slots and 8 high slots, 8 launcher and 8 turret hardpoints and infinite CPU, grid and calibration, just because they need ~improvement~ as if something is somehow wrong with them.


Facetious sarcasm aside it is good to see you coming around. :)

the guy from earlier got it right - if people want to say rig their freighter for maximum cargo - let them, but they should drop even easier than now. even if that maximum is only the current hold size I'd say thats good for the game.

But at least they get that option (and others) and the whole ship class gets a bit more variety. Right now being a freighter pilot is about the most boring, unrewarding and unspecialised job in Eve. One ship fits all and actually not very well.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#125 - 2013-01-09 21:12:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarsas Phage
Vyktor Abyss wrote:

Your problem is you are completely blinkered in terms of what options it could add to the game. Stop the stubborn rage and get into a discussion rather than assuming you know it all and you are right. Cheers.


Ever consider that something just doesn't need to have a plethora of options? Ever consider that there can certainly be inconsistency (in this case, a ship which lacks slots?)

A freighter is made for hauling. That's it, full stop. It is not meant to enter into combat. It is not meant to survive for an extended period if it does. It is the sole tier of ship in its class. It has no equals or alternatives. Thus, it has a highly specific role.

If a freighter pilot wants to be protected, he/she should bring (or even hire) an appropriate escort (this is a MMO after all)

If a freighter pilot is worried that he/she may become a target of a gank, the cargo should be broken up and multiple trips made, or multiple ships make the trip in parallel if such is available.

How come this is so hard to settle on?
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#126 - 2013-01-09 21:15:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
I rather think the point is that freighters are fully intended to be single function floating bulls eye's, whose only protections are it's pilots wisdom and it's own massive bulk. It does one thing and one thing only, slowly haul massive volumes of material in quantities that no other ship in the game can really come close to.

It isn't meant to be a challenging ship to fit, or able to mount a surprise or two. It is meant to be vulnerable and require intelligence and/or teamwork to use in a dangerous environment or when hauling high value cargo.

It's a weak link, and it's meant to be that way... something to protect that can be of high value.... not a super hauler able to AFK immense wealth without a care in the world.

Some things in game SHOULD be vulnerable and limited to excelling at only one specific job. Another example would be the lowly shuttle, or shall we consider adding slots to them as well? Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#127 - 2013-01-09 21:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
the guy from earlier got it right - if people want to say rig their freighter for maximum cargo - let them, but they should drop even easier than now. even if that maximum is only the current hold size I'd say thats good for the game.
…and then we're back to the question no-one who argues for slots can answer:

Why do freighters need a nerf?

Giving the ships options just for the sake of giving it options is utterly pointless, so what is it about freighters that warrants that kind of change? At the moment, freighters are hyper-specialised ships and are the absolute masters of their domain, and no amount of options can make them better. That leaves one direction to change them if any change is to be done… but why on earth would anyone want that?
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#128 - 2013-01-09 21:28:00 UTC
Tarsas Phage wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:

Your problem is you are completely blinkered in terms of what options it could add to the game. Stop the stubborn rage and get into a discussion rather than assuming you know it all and you are right. Cheers.


Ever consider that something just doesn't need to have a plethora of options? Ever consider that there can certainly be inconsistency (in this case, a ship which lacks slots?)

A freighter is made for hauling. That's it, full stop. It is not meant to enter into combat. It is not meant to survive for an extended period if it does. It is the sole tier of ship in its class. It has no equals or alternatives. Thus, it has a highly specific role.

If a freighter pilot wants to be protected, he/she should bring (or even hire) an appropriate escort (this is a MMO after all)

If a freighter pilot is worried that he/she may become a target of a gank, the cargo should be broken up and multiple trips made, or multiple ships make the trip in parallel if such is available.

How come this is so hard to settle on?


Tailoring ships for different roles is what makes this spaceship game more fun. Sorry to answer a question with a question but I've been pretty clear : Why should freighters be the boring exceptions to the tailoring rule?

And for the record I'm not advocating Med or High slots unless they have some industrial purpose like a tractor beam. A freighter with guns and web scram would be a bit moronic I agree. :)
Fallacies
Doomheim
#129 - 2013-01-09 21:33:28 UTC
Andski wrote:
You're right. Freighters should be given 3 rig slots, 8 low slots, 8 mid slots and 8 high slots, 8 launcher and 8 turret hardpoints and infinite CPU, grid and calibration, just because they need ~improvement~ as if something is somehow wrong with them.

The good old slippery slope fallacy.

You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen.

The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture.
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#130 - 2013-01-09 21:47:39 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
the guy from earlier got it right - if people want to say rig their freighter for maximum cargo - let them, but they should drop even easier than now. even if that maximum is only the current hold size I'd say thats good for the game.
…and then we're back to the question no-one who argues for slots can answer:

Why do freighters need a nerf?

Giving the ships options just for the sake of giving it options is utterly pointless, so what is it about freighters that warrants that kind of change? At the moment, freighters are hyper-specialised ships and are the absolute masters of their domain, and no amount of options can make them better. That leaves one direction to change them if any change is to be done… but why on earth would anyone want that?


What you call a nerf is not a nerf at all - it is just specialisation:

I'd like to see freighter specialised for carrying large volume of Ore - maybe even ones that only carry Ore.

Or freighters that can carry fitted ships...
Or freighters that can align quicker or warp quicker (remember that OP warp speed rig?) for those who like to travel in theirs...
Or freighters that can fit a DCU and more tank for the baiter who has everything...
Or freighters that can haul everything a corp owns all in one go if they want to then die in a horrible embarrasing mess shotuing at his useless corpmates on comms....
Or freighters people are less afraid to risk in lowsec / nullsec and wormholes for whatever reason ...

But alas, all these specialisation options should come at a price.

Now forgive me - I'm going to stop foruming, log in and blow something up. o/
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#131 - 2013-01-09 21:48:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Why should freighters be the boring exceptions to the tailoring rule?
Because that makes them better ships for the game. Because changing it would be a massive, needless, pointless nerf. Adding slots just for the sake of having slots is completely senseless given the consequences.

Quote:
What you call a nerf is not a nerf at all - it is just specialisation:
No, it's a move away from specialisation that must be accompanied with a nerf in order not to break things horribly. All ships allowed in highsec have a design restriction that requires them to never be able to carry 1M m³ cargo. If freighters are given slots, the existence of cargo expanding modules and rigs means that each of those slots must be assumed to hold a cargo expansion and when all of them are filled, they will still not have more cargo than they have now. So for every lowslot, a freighter must lose 22% of its base cargo capacity; for every rig slot, it must lose 17% base cargo. End result: adding slots forces a nerf because you end up with a ship that carries less and is weaker than it is now, and there is no way to recreate their current capabilities.

That is not specialisation. That is a nerf. There really are no two ways about it. What you're asking for is freighter variants, which is a whole other kettle of fish and which shouldn't be done through modules since that nerfs the ship for absolutely no useful reason whatsoever.

Fallacies wrote:
The good old slippery slope fallacy.
…except that that wasn't a slipperly slope fallacy. It was a reductio ad absurdum.
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#132 - 2013-01-09 21:49:51 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I rather think the point is that freighters are fully intended to be single function floating bulls eye's, whose only protections are it's pilots wisdom and it's own massive bulk. It does one thing and one thing only, slowly haul massive volumes of material in quantities that no other ship in the game can really come close to.

It isn't meant to be a challenging ship to fit, or able to mount a surprise or two. It is meant to be vulnerable and require intelligence and/or teamwork to use in a dangerous environment or when hauling high value cargo.

It's a weak link, and it's meant to be that way... something to protect that can be of high value.... not a super hauler able to AFK immense wealth without a care in the world.

Some things in game SHOULD be vulnerable and limited to excelling at only one specific job. Another example would be the lowly shuttle, or shall we consider adding slots to them as well? Smile


I agree with you 100%.

Nothing I've posted is contrary to the suggestion they should not be vulnerable space whales prime from the harpooning :)

I also agree some shuttle tailoring would be pimp :) I want one with go faster stripes!
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#133 - 2013-01-09 22:01:17 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Or freighters that can carry fitted ships...


This... could be quite awesome, especially with modules. But then they wouldn't really be freighters - they'd be a new type of carrier. One that carries actual player ships instead of drone fighters. That would be awesome beyond belief. Don't say "Orca" - I mean a real combat carrier, like the "Battle Riders" from SotS2.

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Jamyl Khanid
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#134 - 2013-01-09 22:02:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jamyl Khanid
Marlona Sky wrote:
How much tech is used in jump freighters?


1.8 million Fullerides with an ME BPO
Insane amounts of Carbides
A bunch of other random junk.

- that's off the top of my head for the stat addicts.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#135 - 2013-01-09 22:06:10 UTC
Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Or freighters that can carry fitted ships...


This... could be quite awesome, especially with modules. But then they wouldn't really be freighters - they'd be a new type of carrier. One that carries actual player ships instead of drone fighters. That would be awesome beyond belief. Don't say "Orca" - I mean a real combat carrier, like the "Battle Riders" from SotS2.


You mean like a "Carrier?"

You should see a Ghostriding fleet. Carriers jump to the fight with HICs in cargo, a couple Carrier pilots eject from their ships to board the HICs and tackle the stricken Super.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#136 - 2013-01-09 22:13:02 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:


What you call a nerf is not a nerf at all - it is just specialisation:



You want to force me to make twice as many trips as I make now in exchange for fixing nothing. How is that anything other than a nerf?
Funky Lazers
Funk Freakers
#137 - 2013-01-09 22:18:42 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:

Assuming industry should be focussed in HighSec AND that HighSec should be "safe" then freighters should be buffed to protect the "casual player" (not sure how casual you are if you fly a freighter but regardless).


I'm casual and I fly 2 freighters.

It's a time saver when you have to change the living place.

Whatever.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#138 - 2013-01-09 22:23:40 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
I rather think the point is that freighters are fully intended to be single function floating bulls eye's, whose only protections are it's pilots wisdom and it's own massive bulk. It does one thing and one thing only, slowly haul massive volumes of material in quantities that no other ship in the game can really come close to.

It isn't meant to be a challenging ship to fit, or able to mount a surprise or two. It is meant to be vulnerable and require intelligence and/or teamwork to use in a dangerous environment or when hauling high value cargo.

It's a weak link, and it's meant to be that way... something to protect that can be of high value.... not a super hauler able to AFK immense wealth without a care in the world.

Some things in game SHOULD be vulnerable and limited to excelling at only one specific job. Another example would be the lowly shuttle, or shall we consider adding slots to them as well? Smile


I agree with you 100%.

Nothing I've posted is contrary to the suggestion they should not be vulnerable space whales prime from the harpooning :)

I also agree some shuttle tailoring would be pimp :) I want one with go faster stripes!

Everything you have said is contrary to this.

Freighters have been balanced to fit a very particular role... addling slots means the base stats that would be required to prevent abuse means that it would always fail in it's intended role one way or the other.

They would either be too weak, not carry enough, or be even slower than they are now... and frankly it would ruin them as a ship class. Since no one would consider flying them at that point, your whole "they should be space whales prime for the harpooning" goes right out the window.Smile

Stop shooting yourself in the foot my friend.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#139 - 2013-01-09 22:26:56 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Tailoring ships for different roles is what makes this spaceship game more fun. Sorry to answer a question with a question but I've been pretty clear : Why should freighters be the boring exceptions to the tailoring rule?

And for the record I'm not advocating Med or High slots unless they have some industrial purpose like a tractor beam. A freighter with guns and web scram would be a bit moronic I agree. :)


So how does the freighter need more "tailoring" for its role, that is, hauling stuff in bulk? It seems to perform that role remarkably well.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#140 - 2013-01-09 22:29:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
I'd like to see freighter specialised for carrying large volume of Ore - maybe even ones that only carry Ore.

Or freighters that can carry fitted ships...
Or freighters that can align quicker or warp quicker (remember that OP warp speed rig?) for those who like to travel in theirs...
Or freighters that can fit a DCU and more tank for the baiter who has everything...
Or freighters that can haul everything a corp owns all in one go if they want to then die in a horrible embarrasing mess shotuing at his useless corpmates on comms....
Or freighters people are less afraid to risk in lowsec / nullsec and wormholes for whatever reason ...


Let's see.

1) Orcas and Rorquals
2) The above, carriers, supercarriers and titans
3) Fenrirs with LG Nomad sets and agility hardwirings
4) Orcas
5) Current freighters
6) Jump freighters

Wow, this game already has all of what you seek!

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar