These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Adapt Freighter and Jump Freighter

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#141 - 2013-08-31 12:17:30 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
As I said in my first post arguing against ganking freighters when the overriding principle supporting it is based on a refusal to acknowledge its misplaced and imbalanced position in the game gets everyone nowhere.
In what way is it misplaced or imbalanced?

Maybe this “refusal to acknowledge” this position is because the position has never actually been properly articulated or proven… hmm?

The principle of the EvE system is that high sec is relatively safe, low sec is unsafe and null is very unsafe.

Being able to suicide a capital ship with a few cheap dessies repeatedly in High goes against that principle, devalues and imbalances the ship involved and is socially bad for EvE.

I enjoy inflicting loss and harm on others in EvE however suiciding clearly crosses a line from gameplay to gaming the game. The ability to remove months of a persons effort while putting in none yourself is bad for EvE imo.

Its clearly imbalanced.

I know what you'll try to come back with, not interested really.


you do realise you've just said it's unfair that a large group of players are needed to destroy one ship? and the unfairness is on the part of the one guy on his own.

please tell me you realise what you've just said.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#142 - 2013-08-31 12:19:06 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

Who cares if you move them into highsec. As long as you can't assemble them which is easily fixed.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Dave Stark
#143 - 2013-08-31 12:19:24 UTC
Lugalbandak wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.


well then tey can make it easy , all the mods you fit , except the ******* damn cargo expanders. thats was not hard was it?



and in english?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#144 - 2013-08-31 12:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The principle of the EvE system is that high sec is relatively safe, low sec is unsafe and null is very unsafe.
Not quite. The principle of the EVE systems is that in highsec, aggression comes at a cost; in lowsec, aggression comes at a short-time commitment; and that in nullsec, there is no enforced cost of any kind at all.

In highsec, you can bet against the miserliness of other players not to attack you willy-nilly and build a second layer of personal security around that. In low, you can only bet against the unwillingness of other players to remain in lowsec, and thus have to provide more security for yourself. In null, all bets are off, and if you want any kind of security whatsoever, you have to build it all for yourself from the ground up, preferably in collaboration with other players.

Quote:
Being able to suicide a capital ship with a few cheap dessies repeatedly in High goes against that principle, devalues and imbalances the ship involved and is socially bad for EvE.
Being able to suicide a capital ship in highsec means you lost the bet against other people's miserliness. Chances are that this happened because you chose to not actually make it a matter of miserliness after all, but rather swung it in the direction of greed. Put another way: you presented such a juicy target that the expected outcome of attacking you was no longer a loss, but a net gain.

Quote:
The ability to remove months of a persons effort while putting in none yourself is bad for EvE imo.
And that's a fair opinion. That's why the game is designed in such a way that you have to put in some effort yourself to remove the efforts of that other party.
Lugalbandak
Doomheim
#145 - 2013-08-31 12:21:52 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.


well then tey can make it easy , all the mods you fit , except the ******* damn cargo expanders. thats was not hard was it?



and in english?


that comment makes my day :) out of words ? so you blame sombody who cant write perfect english lol

im very sorry for my grammer and spelling but i think you know what i ment.

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#146 - 2013-08-31 12:21:58 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

Who cares if you move them into highsec. As long as you can't assemble them which is easily fixed.

CCP obviously do, which is why they're not allowed in highsec, unless they're grandfathered in.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#147 - 2013-08-31 12:22:13 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
As I said in my first post arguing against ganking freighters when the overriding principle supporting it is based on a refusal to acknowledge its misplaced and imbalanced position in the game gets everyone nowhere.
In what way is it misplaced or imbalanced?

Maybe this “refusal to acknowledge” this position is because the position has never actually been properly articulated or proven… hmm?

The principle of the EvE system is that high sec is relatively safe, low sec is unsafe and null is very unsafe.

Being able to suicide a capital ship with a few cheap dessies repeatedly in High goes against that principle, devalues and imbalances the ship involved and is socially bad for EvE.

I enjoy inflicting loss and harm on others in EvE however suiciding clearly crosses a line from gameplay to gaming the game. The ability to remove months of a persons effort while putting in none yourself is bad for EvE imo.

Its clearly imbalanced.

I know what you'll try to come back with, not interested really.


you do realise you've just said it's unfair that a large group of players are needed to destroy one ship? and the unfairness is on the part of the one guy on his own.

please tell me you realise what you've just said.

In high sec without a war dec yes. As Oveur said many years ago, high sec is supposed to be relatively safe. There are mechanics in place in high for groups of PvPrs to attack players. Simply finding a workaround doesn't make it balanced.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Dave Stark
#148 - 2013-08-31 12:22:22 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

Who cares if you move them into highsec. As long as you can't assemble them which is easily fixed.


you mean aside from the fact that your ill thought idea has knock on consequences that will require time and effort to fix when instead CCP can carry on ignoring the dumb people who fill their freighter with all their worldly goods and hit undock.

yeah i know, let's make a load of issues just to protect dumb people.

hint; ccp have never protected dumb people, that's why scamming is a perfectly legitimate profession in eve.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#149 - 2013-08-31 12:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

Who cares if you move them into highsec. As long as you can't assemble them which is easily fixed.

CCP obviously do, which is why they're not allowed in highsec, unless they're grandfathered in.

CCP don't want them being used in highsec.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Dave Stark
#150 - 2013-08-31 12:23:24 UTC
Lugalbandak wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.


well then tey can make it easy , all the mods you fit , except the ******* damn cargo expanders. thats was not hard was it?



and in english?


that comment makes my day :) out of words ? so you blame sombody who cant write perfect english lol

im very sorry for my grammer and spelling but i think you know what i ment.


no, i'm genuinely trying to figure out what you're trying to say.
Dave Stark
#151 - 2013-08-31 12:24:28 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
As I said in my first post arguing against ganking freighters when the overriding principle supporting it is based on a refusal to acknowledge its misplaced and imbalanced position in the game gets everyone nowhere.
In what way is it misplaced or imbalanced?

Maybe this “refusal to acknowledge” this position is because the position has never actually been properly articulated or proven… hmm?

The principle of the EvE system is that high sec is relatively safe, low sec is unsafe and null is very unsafe.

Being able to suicide a capital ship with a few cheap dessies repeatedly in High goes against that principle, devalues and imbalances the ship involved and is socially bad for EvE.

I enjoy inflicting loss and harm on others in EvE however suiciding clearly crosses a line from gameplay to gaming the game. The ability to remove months of a persons effort while putting in none yourself is bad for EvE imo.

Its clearly imbalanced.

I know what you'll try to come back with, not interested really.


you do realise you've just said it's unfair that a large group of players are needed to destroy one ship? and the unfairness is on the part of the one guy on his own.

please tell me you realise what you've just said.

In high sec without a war dec yes. As Oveur said many years ago, high sec is supposed to be relatively safe. There are mechanics in place in high for groups of PvPrs to attack players. Simply finding a workaround doesn't make it balanced.


make war decs instant then.

this removes suicide ganking and freighter pilots will be happy. right?
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#152 - 2013-08-31 12:25:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed? its freighter , it hauls large stuff. orca is something different.


So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

Lugalbandak wrote:
I agree with ziona , you used to have bs fleets , and you make it sound ALL the ppl gonna fit cargo expanders , but thats a lie .


Really? After the barge buff the majority of miners still use cargohold expanding rigs even though barges have a dedicated ore hold. I have no idea what you're trying to say about the Battleship fleets.

Lugalbandak wrote:
Like she said you biased and you dont want ccp nerf your incom wich i can understand , but after shuttle to have ships that cannot be fitted is plain stupid


My personal income comes from AFK ratting in 5 Ishtars in different systems for around 300m an hour. I make nothing from ganking freighters because my motive isn't profit.

Lugalbandak wrote:
edit: i dotn know what you mean by heavily nerfing , but it sounds like after your patch you cant even haul a i hub anymore


The cargohold of a freighter would have to be nerfed by a certain percentage to make up for every low slot or rig slot that it gained. To haul iHubs & Station egg's the freighter pilot would have to fit cargohold expanders. Tippia did all of the math on this awhile back, he might post it if you ask nicely.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#153 - 2013-08-31 12:27:48 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
[quote=Lugalbandak]Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

hint; ccp have never protected dumb people, that's why scamming is a perfectly legitimate profession in eve.

They protect nullbears quite a bit with all their invulnerable deployables. Im guessing because they assume nullbears are too dumb to defend them.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#154 - 2013-08-31 12:27:51 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed?


because fitting a single cargo expander would allow freighters to move packaged capitals in to high sec, which is an issue easily avoided by not letting freighters fit cargo modules.

Who cares if you move them into highsec. As long as you can't assemble them which is easily fixed.

CCP obviously do, which is why they're not allowed in highsec, unless they're grandfathered in.

CCP don't want them being used in highsec.


Then explain why a pilot who has had his combat capital ship reimbursed has to move it out of highsec as soon as possible?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Lugalbandak
Doomheim
#155 - 2013-08-31 12:28:48 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
[quote=Lugalbandak]Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed? its freighter , it hauls large stuff. orca is something different.


So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

nope , i already explained , freighters could then fit all the modules except the cargo expanders , problem solved

and i ment your tear income

edit: meh wrong qoute

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#156 - 2013-08-31 12:28:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Skydell
Riot Girl wrote:
Bring logi.


Either you have no idea at all, what you are talking about or you are a bald faced liar, flat out trolling people.

Lugalbandak wrote:

So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

nope , i already explained , freighters could then fit all the modules except the cargo expanders , problem solved

and i ment your tear income

edit: meh wrong qoute


In addition they could change packaged sizes of carriers and Dreads. This tired old excuse for not giving rigs and slots to Freighters died when they adjusted the M3 volume of a Cap ship assembly array because 2 of the freighters required freighter 5 to carry them.
Dave Stark
#157 - 2013-08-31 12:30:36 UTC
Lugalbandak wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
[quote=Lugalbandak]Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed? its freighter , it hauls large stuff. orca is something different.


So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

nope , i already explained , freighters could then fit all the modules except the cargo expanders , problem solved

and i ment your tear income

edit: meh wrong qoute


"hey guys, let's let cargo carrying ships fit all modules except cargo expanders"

no wonder i didn't get what you were saying, it's completely backwards.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#158 - 2013-08-31 12:31:03 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
As Oveur said many years ago, high sec is supposed to be relatively safe. There are mechanics in place in high for groups of PvPrs to attack players. Simply finding a workaround doesn't make it balanced.


He also said that Titans aren't supposed to have a use 7 years ago. Multiple CCP Devs have more recently said that highsec was never supposed to be safe. I'm more inclined to believe the more recent statements as opposed to the statements from that guy 7 years ago.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Lugalbandak
Doomheim
#159 - 2013-08-31 12:31:46 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
[quote=Lugalbandak]Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed? its freighter , it hauls large stuff. orca is something different.


So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

nope , i already explained , freighters could then fit all the modules except the cargo expanders , problem solved

and i ment your tear income

edit: meh wrong qoute


"hey guys, let's let cargo carrying ships fit all modules except cargo expanders"

no wonder i didn't get what you were saying, it's completely backwards.


No it got a huge base cargo bay , no need for extra cargo space , just tank or agile mods

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#160 - 2013-08-31 12:32:20 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Lugalbandak wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
[quote=Lugalbandak]Wy would de base cargohold heavily nerfed? its freighter , it hauls large stuff. orca is something different.


So it wouldn't be able to haul packaged capital ships in to highsec after putting on a cargohold expander.

nope , i already explained , freighters could then fit all the modules except the cargo expanders , problem solved

and i ment your tear income

edit: meh wrong qoute


"hey guys, let's let cargo carrying ships fit all modules except cargo expanders"

no wonder i didn't get what you were saying, it's completely backwards.


He's a renter, they don't really know what's going on.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.