These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Peter Powers
Terrorists of Dimensions
#601 - 2014-05-18 08:02:56 UTC
whats up with that align time nerf? i don't get why this is comming.

3rdPartyEve.net - your catalogue for 3rd party applications

Gumpy Bitterhawk
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
#602 - 2014-05-18 08:03:02 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Gumpy Bitterhawk wrote:
Mag's wrote:
We had to put up with some quite distasteful abuse, when we were informing those that asked for this change. In almost each and every thread that came along. So excuse me for laughing at your request and saying the following.

Told you so.


So, what you are trying to say is, you got trolled, and thats a good excuse to **** up the thread with 'i told you so' **** every 2 or so posts? Get out.
You may wish to label the ones asking for this change, trolls. Seeing the reaction to the changes we predicted, you may indeed be correct. Which only goes to make this change even funnier.

We told you so.


The only troll i see here is you.
Kumiko Kawasumi
Helios Adeptus Mechanicus
#603 - 2014-05-18 08:04:23 UTC
13 Like for this post ?????????????????????? 13 like vs 500 unlike`s..............

Die save and slow

MFG
Mag's
Azn Empire
#604 - 2014-05-18 08:06:23 UTC
Gumpy Bitterhawk wrote:
Mag's wrote:
You may wish to label the ones asking for this change, trolls. Seeing the reaction to the changes we predicted, you may indeed be correct. Which only goes to make this change even funnier.

We told you so.


The only troll i see here is you.
That's OK, I'm used to it. We got a lot of that in threads where we warned people, asking for a change like this. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Dirk MacGirk
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#605 - 2014-05-18 08:08:13 UTC
Nex Killer wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Nex Killer wrote:
Nex Killer wrote:
I have a question about this change the Charon is losing about 30% of its base cargo correct? So does that mean in the BPO is it going to use 30% less capital Cargo Bays? So from needing 105 to only needing 74? Because I think that is only fair with this change and it makes sense.


In hopes of Fozzie seeing this.


LOL are you serious? Like, seriously serious. Build requirements don't go down. Not for supers or titans or anything


Yes I'm serious. Why is that crazy? Build requirements have changed in the past with other ships I don't see why they can't change for capital when is such a dramatic change like this. If freighters were only losing like 5% base cargo fine you wouldn't have to change anything, but they are losing 27-30% of their old base. That is a crazy amount seeing how half of the build requirement for a freighters is capital cargo bays. If supercarriers were to lose 30% of their drone bay I would expect to see a reduction in their build requirements of drone cargo bays.

If they were to lower the capital cargo bays required to build a freighter you'll save about ~260M in build costs and hopefully lowering the sell price a little for people. With that saved isk they can go buy some rigs, but at the moment there isn't a reason to even put rigs on fighters because the rigs themselves cost to much. Tau Cabalander explains it very well:


I just asked if you were serious, not because there isn't logic. But it's the same logic used when they nerfed supers and titans and nothing about the build costs there changed. In fact, I'm not sure build costs have ever gone down. Just up i.e. tiercide. I could be wrong though.
Kumiko Kawasumi
Helios Adeptus Mechanicus
#606 - 2014-05-18 08:09:24 UTC
Why we need enemies, we have ccp and Stuff......................

Die save and slow

MFG
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#607 - 2014-05-18 08:11:57 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
I liked it when you said you wanted to make it better to live in null.
Then you made changes that promise to increase the cost of basically anything if I want to buy it here instead of flying to Jita whenever I want something.
GF.

I don't fly freighters or JF, probably never will, and this is bullshit.
I never asked for rigs. I vaguely remember saying it was a bad idea.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Cheng Chai
Another Corp..
#608 - 2014-05-18 08:14:00 UTC
For jump freighters I applause these changes, maybe they don't even go far enough.

For normal freighters I strongly disagree with the substantial tank nerf. Every 15yo can box 20 catalysts with some ****** cracked software nowadays, give those big whales at least some kind of protection.
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#609 - 2014-05-18 08:14:38 UTC
I hope people didn't want those NullSec supercap wrecking ball fleets anyway?

The proposed freighter nerf is another alteration to HiSec mining, which just helps making the future of industry in EVE even more unpredictable after the industry expansion launches:

*) NullSec cap manufacturers will only want compressed ore, which in HiSec can only be manufactured at a POS. Uncompressed minerals will only be of interest to local manufacturers.

*) The full mineral supply from reprocessed HiSec mission loot will be removed from the NullSec cap and supercap supply chain, as compressed ore cannot be made from minerals, only raw ore.

*) Cost of POS fuel is likely to increase noticeably due to everybody now wanting and being able to anchor a POS in HiSec. No way to predict if PI can increase production to compensate for increased demand, now that there is a hard cap on the amount of belt ice available for harvesting per time.

*) Changes apparently considered by CCP to limit occupation of moons by offline POSes may result in needing to always keep the compression POS online. This would incur a serious and fixed cost per month for POS fuel. For small mining ops it may be more beneficial to ignore the POS altogether and just take the price hit from selling refined minerals or raw ore to HiSec manufacturers / 'ore compression specialists'.

*) Having a POS makes you vulnerable to wardecs. These can be dodged, of course, yet this creates inefficiency due to the time wasted in moving the POS.

*) Moving uncompressed minerals - and Tritanium - was one of the few 'reasonable' uses for the full cargo capacity of a T1 freighter. The freighter nerf means that either:
- Miners are now more limited in the distance they can mine from their compression POS, reducing mobility, if the freighter is rigged for tank. Thus increasing inefficiency due to competition from other miners - and suicide gankers.
- Rigging for cargo means lower EHP and higher overall cost in case of ship loss, increasing the risk of being suicide ganked 'for the lulz'. Overall this statistically increases the cost of running a mining op, reducing profits.

*) The reliance of a compression POS means you either need to mine within a reasonable distance (in jumps) from it, or need to spend time moving the POS along with your mining op. Doing either reduces efficiency.

*) The cost of mining increases due to added consumption of mining crystals, caused by a change in hull bonuses from mining yield to cycle timing.

*) The yield from the Mackinaw is nerfed, and due to its limited ore bay size the buffed Hulk is a right bother to use for fleet mining ops when multi-boxing .

The combined effect on the mineral supply of all these changes will be ... 'interesting' to watch for sure. CCP devs never heard of compound interests...? Roll

Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EvE-oconomy and o-kay for you.

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#610 - 2014-05-18 08:15:55 UTC
Also sticking it to retards who did ask for this is not a good reason to support this change because it's going to hurt a lot of people who didn't (and who don't even fly these ships at all).

It's just going to make living in remote areas of space suck harder than it does already.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Wattwatt
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#611 - 2014-05-18 08:16:46 UTC
These nerfs are pretty ridiculous. You all use fanfest for feed back. You mentioned the rigs you should have said something of the nerf and listened to feed back. Prolly one of the poorest changes you are doing in kronos... I would assume you are adding the rigs to try and find a way to increase the use a salvage to increase the aspect of a profession of salvaging, its a poor attempt I feel.
Dave Stark
#612 - 2014-05-18 08:17:03 UTC
Cheng Chai wrote:
give those big whales at least some kind of protection.

such as the ability to fit tanking rigs?
Dave Stark
#613 - 2014-05-18 08:18:50 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Also sticking it to retards who did ask for this is not a good reason to support this change because it's going to hurt a lot of people who didn't (and who don't even fly these ships at all).


i agree, these changes are in nobody's interest.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#614 - 2014-05-18 08:21:39 UTC
are rigs ever going to get properly balanced? they're pretty horrible compared to what they were intended to be.
Chinicata Shihari
Perkone
Caldari State
#615 - 2014-05-18 08:25:05 UTC
Nex Killer wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Nex Killer wrote:
Nex Killer wrote:
I have a question about this change the Charon is losing about 30% of its base cargo correct? So does that mean in the BPO is it going to use 30% less capital Cargo Bays? So from needing 105 to only needing 74? Because I think that is only fair with this change and it makes sense.


In hopes of Fozzie seeing this.


LOL are you serious? Like, seriously serious. Build requirements don't go down. Not for supers or titans or anything


Yes I'm serious. Why is that crazy? Build requirements have changed in the past with other ships I don't see why they can't change for capital when is such a dramatic change like this. If freighters were only losing like 5% base cargo fine you wouldn't have to change anything, but they are losing 27-30% of their old base. That is a crazy amount seeing how half of the build requirement for a freighters is capital cargo bays. If supercarriers were to lose 30% of their drone bay I would expect to see a reduction in their build requirements of drone cargo bays.

If they were to lower the capital cargo bays required to build a freighter you'll save about ~260M in build costs and hopefully lowering the sell price a little for people. With that saved isk they can go buy some rigs, but at the moment there isn't a reason to even put rigs on fighters because the rigs themselves cost to much. Tau Cabalander explains it very well:

Tau Cabalander wrote:
I was looking forward to the ADDED CHOICE these changes would bring, but instead they REMOVE CHOICECry

Pre-Kronos Charon: 785,000
Post-Kronos Charon: 550,000

Post-Kronos Rigs:
Rig 1: No choice → Capital Cargohold Optimization II (20% for 660,000), -150 Calibration
Rig 2: No choice → Capital Cargohold Optimization II (20% for 792,000), -150 Calibration
Rig 3: Limited Choice → 100 Calibration
Cost: 1.45 billion ISK at current market prices [likely higher post-Kronos], more than the Charon itself!,

Can't fit a structure rig in the optional slot, as it will reduce cargohold /facepalm I told you that was a bad idea for a drawback.

The only logical possibility is a Capital Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I or II.


Now hopefully the price of rigs will go down a few with more people building them. But as of right now there isn't a real reason for people to buy 1.45B in rigs when they could buy a new freighter if they got ganked. Lowering the build price for a freighter and the lowering price of rigs will hopefully get people using rigs on their freighters.


I love how you insist you require T2 cargo rigs. You don't just fit 3 t1's that'll push you over the edge. A

Secondly the reason we pushed for cargo to be the penalty was because why you a freighter become tanky and carry alot. If you improve its weakest ability you should nerf its strongest ability. Simple
Resgo
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#616 - 2014-05-18 08:32:02 UTC
Fozzie,
How about changing that +5% Maximum Velocity per level bonus on the freighters to a +5% Warp Speed per level bonus?
K1netic
Devastating Designs
#617 - 2014-05-18 08:35:53 UTC
plz add jump fuel conservation rigs and implants Fozzie come on!!
Stalker ofeveryone
Doomheim
#618 - 2014-05-18 08:38:48 UTC
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#619 - 2014-05-18 08:43:07 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealin'lak wrote:
Gotta appreciate the irony....

1- Use Fanfest to announce the "Awesome addition of rigs to Freighters and Jump Freighters".

2- Get everybody hyped up and expecting a nice addition for their ships.

3- Eventually come out saying that those "awesome additions" to Freighters and Jump Freighters hide what is actually an "intended" (to quote CCP Fozzie) nerf....

It's a REAL sad day when you realize politicians could learn a trick or two from CCP :(


Cant blaim CCP for people thinking they would add rigs without nerfing the freighters to keep them balanced. They were warned this would happen.


baltec - seriously does it matter if some players were warned by a handful of other players? Can we just stipulate for the record that a few people knew the outcome and were proven right. Yes, you were right. Dave was right, Trip was right. I completely agree some of you were involved in previous threads combating the idiots. You should get a medal from everyone else.



I am pretty sure you can dig up every single "buff freighter, give them rigs/modules" thread in the past 12 months and EVERY single one of them will have the "CCP could do that, but they would take something away to counter - is that what you want?"

That is not "some players, warned by handful of others". That is every single on-this-forum advocate being warned about it.
~told you so~
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#620 - 2014-05-18 08:44:46 UTC
So, since we are doing this to freighters/JFs, when can we expect shuttles and pods getting rigs?

P.S., the sad thing is that I'm actually somewhat serious about this question, judging by what I've read/seen happen to this game over the 4 years I've been playing.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."