Player Features and Ideas Discussion

1: You have been insulting people this entire thread, you should feel ashamed of yourself. I honestly don't care if you insult me, just makes you look like a child and makes me laugh.

2: I honestly don't think you understand basic logistics. If a big alliance has the inability to gear up for your...'convoys' that you so envision, who in the hell right mind will make you think that smaller alliances will have this ability?

3: And you are mistaken if you believe that people will kill your freighter just cause you have high value cargo, if they find out that your JF for a corp, and seeing the cost of JFs are through the roof. Destroying their supply chain is a great way to cripple a smaller alliance, The lost of one JF will not only set them back a few billion for a new frieghter, but it will also set them back in time, and people's willing to do said job.

4:I thought this was a change to low sec, not empire corps

5: You won't see any Frieghter convoys at all because when the hostile spots the freighter their first target will be that, they can worry about everything else later. You my friend need to actually get into a JF so you know how it works before making a suggestion like this.

6:If you wish to increase opportunities for pvp, then you should, as people been stating, create incentives. You might want to look this word up, but I will give you a run down. When you create a incentive on something, that means more people are willing to throw their lives to the grinder if that means that they have a good chance of make hell-ova lot of money...Your idea in it current form is what we call a disincentive which is the opposite of a incentive.

7: You asking how some fail and others do not, but you are making a question based on a the current system to back your new system. That's called generating proof from a non-existing situation. I see people do it all the time in my English 101 class, I do it sometimes to but...When you use that system you have very little support to back your claim.

8: I will quote myself right now for this one: If it makes it that much harder for bigger alliances to hold sov, who have manpower and the isk to support it, who in their right mind will think a smaller alliance, with less manpower and isk would be able to hold a sov point?

Posting in a "Capitals and super capitals shouldn't be allowed in lowsec anymore, and all the capital builders in lowsec shouldnt be able to build capitals anymore" thread.

This is without a doubt, the STUPIDEST idea I've read since James 315 proposed to get everyone out of highsec by deleting (almost) all highsec content.

Okay, I'm bored so I'll throw in my 2 cents worth:


Jump Drives can only be activated in 0.4 space and under.

Ship must be at least 100km from any structure to activate the jump drive. If cap level is under 75%, additional power is taken from Shield / Armour / Hull

20 second timer from activation til jump drive initiates

Cynos must be deployed at least 100km from any structure


So here come the tears:

If you jump & you're taking damage / have zero cap, Expect a high chance of arriving and watching your ship explode

Yeah but there's a higher chance of getting jumped being that far from the station / POS - Boo Hoo, this ain't Carebears online. Welcome to Low sec / Null sec. Enjoy your stay


Workable? Probably not but the tears it would bring... PRICELESS

NPC Alts for freighters would still be used, aside from losing the ability to freely web a freighter for instawarps, anyone who tries to gank the freighter is free fire to EVERYONE and i dont remember CCP ninja fixing NEUTRAL logi in the last couple of days. Also over this weekend 14 (reported on Eve kill) freighters were ganked in high sec, alot of them were swarmed with destroyers so i think your cost estimate for a gank is off too. Also it would only around 40 tornados to alpha a JF.

Also the points others have made about small alliances suffering is incredibly STRONG, if a large alliance would have trouble with this change a small one would have no chance. Other than HED and EC- all other JFs would have to trouble low-sec in a fleet and then jump into null, be bumped out of the almost guaranteed entrance system bubbles, and then jump to the cyno in their system most likely through a midpoint because all the empire hugging systems will be taken. All in all that JF is dead it will very likely die somewhere and the loss would be game-ending to a small alliance a 7-8bill jf + its 2-3bill cargo.

So yes a lot more ships will die but you’ll most likely end all small scale 0.0 alliances.

I actually have been following this thread quite closely, and fully understand that you are the only one that is supporting this horrible idea. I also find it funny that this character of your's is 5 months old and still stuck in the NPC corps, so that flags to me that you don't have any low sec or null sec experience, or this is your Alt, and you still don't have any low sec or null sec experience, nor have you ever done corp logistics.

You also have this very annoying habit of using insults to dodge the argument people provide. I think 3 or 4 of the post, you actually responded to SOME of the argument but you dodge the stuff you couldn't respond to by insulting us. This my friend is not a great way to get your idea reviewed by CCP, seeing you need to have large player base supporting your idea, and if you insult the player base...*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

If you actually gave use a reasonable argument instead of insulting us...And actually done some research... Like talking to a large/small alliance logistics person to learn about how hard their job is you might actually gain some insight on why people are hating on your idea so much, and thus changing it to match or letting this one die and coming up with an entirely new idea.


I don't insult people to often, I just give them insight on how other people view them.

You talk about risk vs reward, but then you suggest slow, 6 billion isk ships with no fittings should have to traverse low and null sec. When making 'risk vs reward' arguments you can't just pile on ridiculous amounts of risk without any meaningful reward.

Before cutting the supply lines from high to null sec you have to provide the tools for industry to thrive in null sec. CCP has done a poor job of addressing this issue, and their band-aid fix is the jump freighter.

Question for you. Despite knowing what this thread is actually about, AKA nerf everything with a jump drive.... Did you get hotdrop while you were rattting in low sec?

Did you also think about the cost of lowsec and null minerals will also increase with this change?

Did you also think about the smaller alliance? (based on the arguments going on, I have already established that as a no.)

Do you fly a jump freighter? If not, what makes you think you have greater knowledge on how logistics work then everyone else here?

Finally and not least, why do you keep ignore my post? Are my arguments that strong? And have you noticed you are the only one fighting for this idea?

It still isn't. These changes would force indy on the current incumbents of sov, who have by their actions shown they are not up for it, nor to it. There will be blood in the water as they are now faced with managing their logistics in the face of heightened threats.
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

This is nonsense. There is no reason why in high sec an NPC corp hauler alt would not work thus side-stepping war decs. Further, said NPC alt can join any fleet he is invited too, so again no reason not to use an alt in an NPC corp.

I don't see why any of the above paragraph has to obtain based on the changes you are suggesting.

That's the first thing you've gotten right (If we don't count direct quotations) in this entire topic.
Your suggestion had no validity to begin with, and as such no argument can diminish that.

For my part, the offer made here still stand: When you give an argument for your idea, with either evidence or sound reasoning to support it, and that idea is in line with your stated goal, I'll be interested in giving it feedback. I'm certain that's a sentiment shared by others.
Until then ...