These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Freighters and Jump Freighters Rebalance [Updated]

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Valterra Craven
#2121 - 2014-05-21 20:08:40 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Oh, and for those thinking that armour-tanking is a good idea…

Providence: gives up 33.1pp tank for 160k m³.
Charon: gives up 35.6pp tank for 171k m³.
Obelisk: gives up 38.8pp tank for 162k m³.
Fenrir: gives up 26.0pp tank for 160k m³.
Ark: gives up 18.4pp tank for 50k m³.
Rhea: gives up 36.7pp tank for 53k m³.
Anshar: gives up 36.6pp tank for 51k m³.
Nomad: gives up 27.9pp tank for 49k m³.

To clarify: if the providence armour tanks, it gets a 33.1 percentage points lower tank increase (18.2% rather than 51.3%) than if it had chosen to hull tank, but doesn't lose the 30% cargo space that a full hull tank costs.


Based on this it would appear that EHP should likely be adjusted some... It dosn't make sense that the fenrir would get 10pp more tank than a Charon for only losing 9km3, Course the Obelisk looks really bad for some strange reason. Couldn't this be balanced to all of them be around 30% even?
Yumiko Shaku
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2122 - 2014-05-21 20:09:15 UTC
Only issue I see is CPU you said yourself in the post that you can see JF's fitting cap power relays, but each CPR is 6cpu with perfect fitting and your giving it a base 5 CPU so even with skills your only gonna be able to fit 1
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2123 - 2014-05-21 20:09:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
Many people mentioned that Armor freighters will be ahead of shield ones, but the situation is worse than what a raw EHP calculation would say. Shields have a 0% EM resist hole. In the OP resists were mentioned, but only Nomad gets EM resist. On the other hand the armor has no such resist hole. Any reasonable ganker would open with a few tornadoes with Faction EMP L to eat the shield and then the Taloses finish the armor and hull.
And for any ship that is trying to armour tank, they'll just open up with Fusion M and hit the armour resist hole. And since the poor sod decided to fit a horrible tank rather than one that protects him, he'll explode very quickly.

Valterra Craven wrote:
Based on this it would appear that EHP should likely be adjusted some... It dosn't make sense that the fenrir would get 10pp more tank than a Charon for only losing 9km3, Course the Obelisk looks really bad for some strange reason. Couldn't this be balanced to all of them be around 30% even?

Nah. The lesson is simply that, just because you can fit something doesn't mean it's a good idea. The Obelisk looks really bad because it's a particularly bad idea to try to tank it with armour. Conclusion: don't try to armour tank.
Gaijin Lanis
Gallente Federation
#2124 - 2014-05-21 20:13:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:
Shizuken wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


The base cargo capacity of Freighters is being decreased so that a set of three Tech Two Expanded Cargoholds adds 21-25% cargo above the previous maximum values. For Jump Freighters, three T2 Expanders will increase cargo capacity by 1-2%.
This means that Freighters can get significantly higher maximum capacity than before using modules, and we're increasing the volume of packaged capital ships (to 1.3 million m3) and unpackaged station containers (to 2 million m3) to compensate.



I am still not sure why CCP is so afraid of caps in highsec, especially even unassembled ones. It would make trading them easier.


Is the cap ban before they changed the old aoe doommsdays? if so then i understand. Cant have titans doing supernovas' on the jita undock.

But now, doomsdays are "aimed" weapons.I dont see why not now.

Ofcourse If they did naturally, using doomsdays in hisec would be a criminal offence and youd get alpha'd by concord.


The capital ban is to stop large powerblocs trivially dominating high sec.

If the ban was removed, then the face of hi-sec would change overnight.
mmm, no. The only thing caps would be able to shoot at are war targets (as concord would blap them for shooting anything else). Meaning all that would happen is the powerblocs would be able to have a (very public) pissing contest over who can use the trade hubs. Which, if anything, would make jita more interesting, as its the only system/node with a backbone capable of handling a powerbloc fight without 99.9% time dilation.

Not to mention, if you're concerned about powerblocs taking control of the trade hubs, declaring war on anyone not in a NPC corporation, then demanding regular tribute in order to release said war declaration, Marmite collective already does that without capitals. So the only difference is, possibly, marmite collective might have some actual competition.

The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
#2125 - 2014-05-21 20:14:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Oh, and for those thinking that armour-tanking is a good idea…

Providence: gives up 33.1pp tank for 160k m³.
Charon: gives up 35.6pp tank for 171k m³.
Obelisk: gives up 38.8pp tank for 162k m³.
Fenrir: gives up 26.0pp tank for 160k m³.
Ark: gives up 18.4pp tank for 50k m³.
Rhea: gives up 36.7pp tank for 53k m³.
Anshar: gives up 36.6pp tank for 51k m³.
Nomad: gives up 27.9pp tank for 49k m³.

To clarify: if the providence armour tanks, it gets a 33.1 percentage points lower tank increase (18.2% rather than 51.3%) than if it had chosen to hull tank, but doesn't lose the 30% cargo space that a full hull tank costs.


So have you corrected the chart now for the calculations we talked earlier about? or are they still off?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2126 - 2014-05-21 20:17:02 UTC
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:
So have you corrected the chart now for the calculations we talked earlier about? or are they still off?

Which ones?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#2127 - 2014-05-21 20:17:16 UTC
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
Many people mentioned that Armor freighters will be ahead of shield ones, but the situation is worse than what a raw EHP calculation would say. Shields have a 0% EM resist hole. In the OP resists were mentioned, but only Nomad gets EM resist. On the other hand the armor has no such resist hole. Any reasonable ganker would open with a few tornadoes with faction EMP L to eat the shield and then the Taloses finish the armor and hull.

My point is that it takes about half as many ships to remove the shield of a Charon than to remove the armor of a Providence.





Does it really matter if Armor tanking is better than shield tanking on freighters? Especially since HULL tanking offers the largest "tank increase"? I realize that in RR situations, having higher-resists armor with larger armor buffers is very helpful, but the mechanics of armor reppers healing at the end of the 3-5 s cycle is also a large drawback in suicide gank situations, as these events are < 20s in duration.
Valterra Craven
#2128 - 2014-05-21 20:23:17 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
Based on this it would appear that EHP should likely be adjusted some... It dosn't make sense that the fenrir would get 10pp more tank than a Charon for only losing 9km3, Course the Obelisk looks really bad for some strange reason. Couldn't this be balanced to all of them be around 30% even?

Nah. The lesson is simply that, just because you can fit something doesn't mean it's a good idea. The Obelisk looks really bad because it's a particularly bad idea to try to tank it with armour. Conclusion: don't try to armour tank.


But why is fitting a small tank when you want to keep the same level of cargo not a good idea? (I worded this on purpose so as not to setup a two choice only scenario :) )160k m3 is over 25% of your cargo on all these ships, so its not like a mid point between those two options should be right off hand considered bad, unless of course you are on obelisk.
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
#2129 - 2014-05-21 20:23:32 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
Many people mentioned that Armor freighters will be ahead of shield ones, but the situation is worse than what a raw EHP calculation would say. Shields have a 0% EM resist hole. In the OP resists were mentioned, but only Nomad gets EM resist. On the other hand the armor has no such resist hole. Any reasonable ganker would open with a few tornadoes with Faction EMP L to eat the shield and then the Taloses finish the armor and hull.
And for any ship that is trying to armour tank, they'll just open up with Fusion M and hit the armour resist hole. And since the poor sod decided to fit a horrible tank rather than one that protects him, he'll explode very quickly.

Valterra Craven wrote:
Based on this it would appear that EHP should likely be adjusted some... It dosn't make sense that the fenrir would get 10pp more tank than a Charon for only losing 9km3, Course the Obelisk looks really bad for some strange reason. Couldn't this be balanced to all of them be around 30% even?

Nah. The lesson is simply that, just because you can fit something doesn't mean it's a good idea. The Obelisk looks really bad because it's a particularly bad idea to try to tank it with armour. Conclusion: don't try to armour tank.


Either that or a crap ton of quake. the kinetic resist ain't exactly good either. with the given resist does better overall than t1 fusion but not as much as RF fusion.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#2130 - 2014-05-21 20:24:02 UTC
still kinda worried about the armour freighters supported with logi and boosts.

provi with 185kehp in armour alone.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2131 - 2014-05-21 20:24:07 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
But why is fitting a small tank when you want to keep the same level of cargo not a good idea?
Because you get better results with an expander/bulkhead combo.
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
#2132 - 2014-05-21 20:25:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:
So have you corrected the chart now for the calculations we talked earlier about? or are they still off?

Which ones?


This chart you originally posted which i thought we agreed was too high?


http://eve.beyondreality.se/pics/Kronos/FreighterCargoTank.png

Jatok Reknar
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#2133 - 2014-05-21 20:25:43 UTC
Thanks CCP and CSM for listening to our feedback and adjusting the plan. :) I am looking forward to this change now! Big smile
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2134 - 2014-05-21 20:26:29 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
Based on this it would appear that EHP should likely be adjusted some... It dosn't make sense that the fenrir would get 10pp more tank than a Charon for only losing 9km3, Course the Obelisk looks really bad for some strange reason. Couldn't this be balanced to all of them be around 30% even?

Nah. The lesson is simply that, just because you can fit something doesn't mean it's a good idea. The Obelisk looks really bad because it's a particularly bad idea to try to tank it with armour. Conclusion: don't try to armour tank.


But why is fitting a small tank when you want to keep the same level of cargo not a good idea? (I worded this on purpose so as not to setup a two choice only scenario :) )160k m3 is over 25% of your cargo on all these ships, so its not like a mid point between those two options should be right off hand considered bad, unless of course you are on obelisk.


If your goal is not to achieve the best tank possible, then fitting armor tank to save a bit of space might be a good idea. It's just not a good one if you want to maximise your tank at all cost. The tipping point of value/m3 where you go from "should use full tank" to "should go cargo" is not all that wide to have "should go medium tank"... It might happen but most case are probably one way or another.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2135 - 2014-05-21 20:26:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:
This chart you originally posted which i thought we agreed was too high?

http://eve.beyondreality.se/pics/Kronos/FreighterCargoTank.png
The only thing that was too high was the cargo, with half a percent per expander. It's been adjusted.

…or, well… all the numbers are a bit too high, but that's Fozzie's fault and not something I can fix in the tables. P
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
#2136 - 2014-05-21 20:28:19 UTC
Holy hell this forum is ridiculous at how fast it's going. We're over 109 pages and it's only been up 5 days LOL.
unidenify
Deaf Armada
#2137 - 2014-05-21 20:29:49 UTC
So, It is intended to not allow Damage Control on Freighter?

any reason why you feel that it is not allowing?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2138 - 2014-05-21 20:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
unidenify wrote:
So, It is intended to not allow Damage Control on Freighter?

any reason why you feel that it is not allowing?

Because it's too powerful and too cheap and generally impossible to balance against without making it a mandatory module.
Valterra Craven
#2139 - 2014-05-21 20:31:02 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Because you get better results with an expander/bulkhead combo.


Yes, at significant costs to your ships capability. I mean if you're shield tanking a combat ship its not as if fitting more tank makes your DPS suffer.... (Though you could say that about armor ships in a round about way)

I guess the real question here is how much space do you need to hit the 1-2bil cargo limit. Since most people here were stating that a majority of the time the goods they were moving never filled a freighter up before they hit the cargo cost limit, how much m3 were the using? If it was less space than what you would loose to hull tanking, aka 1-2bil is 150k m3, then sure fit a hull tank, but if 1-2bil goods is closer to say 300k-400k m3 then fit armor?
Valterra Craven
#2140 - 2014-05-21 20:34:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
Also, has anyone run the numbers for what the new baseline is for cargo cost?

Aka if you run with no low slots how much value can you stuff before you get ganked?
Aka if you run with max tank how much value can you stuff before you get ganked?
Aka if you run with max cargo how much value can you stuff before you get ganked?