These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Daenika
Chambers of Shaolin
#2161 - 2014-05-21 21:15:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
They're changing it:

“We are also going to swap the speed penalty on all reinforced bulkhead modules to an equal percentage cargo capacity penalty. The agility penalty will remain intact at this time.”.


Well boo.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#2162 - 2014-05-21 21:15:58 UTC
Thank you CCP Fozzie and ship balancing team Smile

Low slots are far better solution than rigs and provides additional gameplay and planning options. The numbers looks OK so far (I admit I've only looked at Freighters/JFs I could fly). I'm so glad that you got away from the rig approach, since it's kind of a permanent fit rather than having options.
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#2163 - 2014-05-21 21:17:15 UTC
2nd iteration is gr8.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Ramona Quimby
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2164 - 2014-05-21 21:17:31 UTC
These modified changes are better, but STILL freighters needs more EHP, and maybe across the board warp/align speeds buffs (but feel free to nerf sub-warp speed to make ganking autopiloters even easier, they deserve to be prey).

Now, eat crow gankers, all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf. That was just whining gankers trying to control the narrative to prevent freighters from being rebalanced to reflect DPS increases and thus ease of ganking. But, gankers are really a tiny, but very loud, minority, Eve could frankly do without you, it can't do with the carebears. So rigs announced as straight buff, gankers whine, rigs changed to nerfs, haulers and industrials unsub in mass, CCP realizes who really matters, freighters get low slots, ganker tears ensue and we get to tell them their own motto HTFU or GTFO.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2165 - 2014-05-21 21:17:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
777 Tsuruomo wrote:
Max armor resists on lets say a Anshar with some Deadspace resistance plating (2 adaptive, 1 explosive ~210 M)
Yes, let's turn a ship that's normally targeted for its cargo into a loot piñata with its fittings alone… Lol

Oh, wait. i forget. These are freighter pilots we're talking about. They're really going to do that, aren't they? LolLol

Ramona Quimby wrote:
These modified changes are better, but STILL freighters needs more EHP, and maybe across the board warp/align speeds buffs (but feel free to nerf sub-warp speed to make ganking autopiloters even easier, they deserve to be prey).
No, they really don't. In fact, it's fairly likely at this point that their EHP numbers will be dialled back to more sensible numbers.

Quote:
Now, eat crow gankers, all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf.
…and guess what? It was, and they were. Did you miss the first 90 pages of this thread?
Dave Stark
#2166 - 2014-05-21 21:20:52 UTC
Ramona Quimby wrote:
all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf.

not sure if you noticed; but they did get a nerf. that's why there were 60 pages of whining, and ccp had to change it for low slots.
777 Tsuruomo
Nightlies Frieght Service
#2167 - 2014-05-21 21:24:21 UTC
Tippia wrote:
777 Tsuruomo wrote:
Max armor resists on lets say a Anshar with some Deadspace resistance plating (2 adaptive, 1 explosive ~210 M)
Yes, let's turn a ship that's normally targeted for its cargo into a loot piñata with its fittings alone… Lol

Oh, wait. i forget. These are freighter pilots we're talking about. They're really going to do that, aren't they? LolLol

Ramona Quimby wrote:
These modified changes are better, but STILL freighters needs more EHP, and maybe across the board warp/align speeds buffs (but feel free to nerf sub-warp speed to make ganking autopiloters even easier, they deserve to be prey).
No, they really don't. In fact, it's fairly likely at this point that their EHP numbers will be dialled back to more sensible numbers.

Quote:
Now, eat crow gankers, all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf.
…and guess what? It was, and they were. Did you miss the first 90 pages of this thread?


heh, went off a bit of a tangent and then realized I was looking at the wrong column for the ehp and 3 bulk heads... sleep time Smile
vikari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2168 - 2014-05-21 21:27:00 UTC
You are still nerfing the hell out of JFs....

over 5 seconds gained in alignment for every JF type, over 6 for most. You know with all 3 low slots being cargo expanders and that giving only 1-2% increase in cargo, you are forcing JFs to fit cargo expanders. It's to expensive to fly them, not too. So exactly how are we going to make up for the loss alignment time?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2169 - 2014-05-21 21:29:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
vikari wrote:
You are still nerfing the hell out of JFs....

over 5 seconds gained in alignment for every JF type, over 6 for most. You know with all 3 low slots being cargo expanders and that giving only 1-2% increase in cargo, you are forcing JFs to fit cargo expanders. It's to expensive to fly them, not too. So exactly how are we going to make up for the loss alignment time?

Reduce the alignment time; reduce warp time; reduce fuel costs. Make up for lost cargo by making more runs faster and at much lower costs.
Walter Hart White
Heisenberg Minings
#2170 - 2014-05-21 21:29:54 UTC
vikari wrote:
You are still nerfing the hell out of JFs....

over 5 seconds gained in alignment for every JF type, over 6 for most. You know with all 3 low slots being cargo expanders and that giving only 1-2% increase in cargo, you are forcing JFs to fit cargo expanders. It's to expensive to fly them, not too. So exactly how are we going to make up for the loss alignment time?

Huge EHP buff.
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2171 - 2014-05-21 21:30:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
Am I the only one who's sad at the powergrid and CPU given to these ships?

Enough for a DCU would be nice....

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Walter Hart White
Heisenberg Minings
#2172 - 2014-05-21 21:31:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
vikari wrote:
You are still nerfing the hell out of JFs....

over 5 seconds gained in alignment for every JF type, over 6 for most. You know with all 3 low slots being cargo expanders and that giving only 1-2% increase in cargo, you are forcing JFs to fit cargo expanders. It's to expensive to fly them, not too. So exactly how are we going to make up for the loss alignment time?

Reduce the alignment time; reduce warp time; reduce fuel costs. Make up for lost cargo by making more runs faster and at much lower costs.

Holy..... ****? Tippia actually siding with JF pilots? Now I can die happily, I have seen it all...
Silvetica Dian
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2173 - 2014-05-21 21:31:30 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
You can forget about ganking anshars alltogether 670k+ ehp.
They can still carry well over 100k m3 at that ehp.


That person has made the decision to fly a bomb shelter at the expense of pretty much every other consideration. For ~7 billion ISK, they should get a pretty good bomb shelter. They'll still die if caught, it'll just take a damnably long time to kill them.

Put another way, I'm not sure that many jump freighter pilots are going to put up with the extra hassle of a mere 100km3 cargohold just to have a hilariously redundant tank. They're already used to taking measures to avoid getting caught, so they'll fit to the assumption that they're unlikely to get caught.



Jita to null home= undock , jump dock. deliver cargo of pvp ships
Null to Jita is cargo of exploration loot , jump to Lsec and jump high, gate to gate to jita with low volume high value cargo.
Guess which way is cargo and which way tank?

Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85
Craven More
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2174 - 2014-05-21 21:32:03 UTC
Grenn Putubi wrote:

I was fine with them getting rig slots because it would allow all the freighters to still compete on an even field, but giving low slots and no mids really changes the balance. If you're going to start giving the freighters module slots then you need to actually give them all slots they can use effectively.

Shield tank freighters should get at least 1 mid slot and 1 less low slot, then adjust their cargo holds so that they have greater base cargo space and end up competitive with the armor freighters using 3 cargo expanders while using only 2.


I understand your idea behind wanting to give shield tankers a mid slot, but lets be honest, it would not really achieve anything & I'd be curious to see, how many people would fore go using it for invul field & instead use it for micro warp drive instead ?.
Ramona Quimby
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2175 - 2014-05-21 21:33:23 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Ramona Quimby wrote:
all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf.

not sure if you noticed; but they did get a nerf. that's why there were 60 pages of whining, and ccp had to change it for low slots.


Not sure if you noticed; but they didn't get a nerf at first. Rigs were a straight buff, with only sub-warp speed drawbacks, then you and all you the other fail easymode gankers whined, Fozzie made the mistake of listening to you, this thread ensued because the bear was poked.
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2176 - 2014-05-21 21:34:37 UTC
thank you

this provides a much more flexible and affordable option to fitting

in addition the player has much more choice in terms of deciding how much nerf vs tank vs speed they want and the ability to change it as their needs change without having to drop billions on rigs

there is only one small issue with the freighters and others have mentioned it - that the armour freighters end up at the higher end of the spectrum in terms of ehp than the two that have more shield. Although it might not seem like much, anyone who can so the math is going to recommend that you choose to train the armour versions vs the shield variants. Every bit of protection and advantage helps.

i suspect that over time we will end up with two heavily used freighter types and two used less

that being said its minor - overall the approach is much better than the previous iteration, ty CSM and Fozzie
Walter Hart White
Heisenberg Minings
#2177 - 2014-05-21 21:34:37 UTC
Craven More wrote:
Grenn Putubi wrote:

I was fine with them getting rig slots because it would allow all the freighters to still compete on an even field, but giving low slots and no mids really changes the balance. If you're going to start giving the freighters module slots then you need to actually give them all slots they can use effectively.

Shield tank freighters should get at least 1 mid slot and 1 less low slot, then adjust their cargo holds so that they have greater base cargo space and end up competitive with the armor freighters using 3 cargo expanders while using only 2.


I understand your idea behind wanting to give shield tankers a mid slot, but lets be honest, it would not really achieve anything & I'd be curious to see, how many people would fore go using it for invul field & instead use it for micro warp drive instead ?.

Easily fixed. All those modules require powergrid and cpu. Make freighters have 100% CPU & powergrid costs of adv. invul. field (and it's derivatives).
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#2178 - 2014-05-21 21:35:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
What you're asking for is to have new players handcuffed by pricetags just because your entitlement tells you that you should never have to die.

Pathetic.


I don't think that's what I asked for, no. What I in fact asked for was the effort required to kill one of these things in high sec, or anywhere come to think of it, better reflect the amount it actually costs and the fact that it's a prestige item that only Supers and Titans are able to beat in terms of cost.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2179 - 2014-05-21 21:43:11 UTC
I think fozzie needs to update OP to reflect why there's not enough fittings for a DCU. Every tenth post keeps asking for one without reading other replies.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#2180 - 2014-05-21 21:49:15 UTC
vikari wrote:
You are still nerfing the hell out of JFs....

over 5 seconds gained in alignment for every JF type, over 6 for most. You know with all 3 low slots being cargo expanders and that giving only 1-2% increase in cargo, you are forcing JFs to fit cargo expanders. It's to expensive to fly them, not too. So exactly how are we going to make up for the loss alignment time?


I'm just curious to know why you care about align time at all? If you're jumping to low sec you should be immediately initiating warp to the gate and getting your cyno alt to triple web you so you insta-warp. You should then be docking at the first station you find in the next system and transferring your stuff into a regular freighter and then using that to haul with no more than around 2b worth of stuff in it each trip (gate-to-gate, not autopilot). I do that even if it's 20b, 10 trips. It takes so long to earn that much it's not problem to me if it takes days to move it.

The way to keep your JF safe is just to have it in space for the absolute minimum amount of time. There's really no other strategy if CCP aren't going to allow it to have a tank commensurate with its cost.