Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Okay i've been bowheading junk around for a while now and the more i do so the more i am convinced this needs to be a thing (atleast in part) because GODDAMN i hate having to unload my boosters every single time...

That or instead of living from a suitcase actually unpack in hotel rooms, which ofcourse always results in you leaving junk behind that you KNOW you had when you left...

Drugs are also screwed up in contracts.
Why i cannot contract them to someone that will haul them 20jumps away ... all around the nullsec.

One simple flag:
- CanBeContractedToHigsec

If it is FALSE , then you cannot create contract to higsec , this flag can be also added to final plastic wrap , so it cannot be double wrapped.

This contract will be also WHITE, with BIG RED CROSS so it can be easily noticed by players wanting to venture into the lair of higsec nonsense.

For me is not about hauling but about moving stuff in ships.
Every time pull out every thing and put back ( and usually forget some stuff or put wrong).
Nothing like a rail harpy full of T2 blaster ammo

This 10k ore in a frigate can be solved very easily - specialized commodity cargo MUST be empty , or fleet hangar of T2 transports.

This simple way we dropped carrier capability to haul to 1/3??

A: Compressed ore was just a convenient example. Regardless of the type of item that goes into the haulers, using haulers to massively amplify cargo carrying capacity is not working as intended.

B: Despite the fact the you can put ammo and other charges in haulers, it's a gauche byproduct of permitting ammo in ships, not a feature intended by itself. In an ideal situation, it would be removed as well.


As my earlier proposal goes:

Allow all non industrial ships to carry any type of item in the cargohold.
Prevent all industrials from hauling anything at all, including ammo.

That would permit us to bring along whatever we wanted in our combat ships, without people abusing the carriers as budget grade bulk haulers.

Everyone's happy, except those who wanted 200k m3 carrier haulers.

Let's just go ahead and use Ore as an example again, although the same method can apply to Ore, Ice, Minerals, PI, Gas, or Ammo

At 265K m3 for say a Miasmos, you can fit 3 of them in the ship maintenance bay of a carrier, with an individual carrying capacity of 65,407 M3. Let's round that to just 65.

With three in the ship maintenance array, you can carry a total of 195K with the three, with 205 K m3 of extra space left over, enough for another 12k From a Blockage Runner.

That makes a total of 207K m3 carried in the holds of specialized ships.

There are of course, a bit less less available if we are using no specialized ships.

A pair of Occators with an individual carrying capacity of 86.9(62,500 corp+ 24.4k normal) (lets call it 90) K m3 + one blockade runner @ 12k m3 amount to a measly 192k M3 of space for items that are not Ore, Ice, Gas, Minerals, PI, Ammo, or Charges, all of which could be more efficiently stored by a specialized hauler.

So 207Kish M3 for items than can fit in a specced bay, and a mere 192K m3 for items that cannot. So not quite 200K for ALL items, but for many items, and over 90% that amount for the rest. If we include the normal 10k Corp hangar array of the carrier, 200K m3 on all items becomes achievable.

Glad to see the thread is backsliding to absolute statements without support. Handwaving and insisting there is no issue without actually addressing why or why not. Filling up three ships is a matter of a minute or two on each end of the trip. Not exactly a huge barrier to use.

And in the spirit of not having to back up anything, I propose my opinion to mirror your opinion stated as fact.

There is an issue. The idea is bad.

A: People run missions in highsec. I consider that suicidally boring, but apparently, a very large number of people disagree with me.
B: Is that supposed to be a compelling reason there for introducing the ability to do so in the first place? That in the situation of long distance travel, you who already own a JF or have easy access to someone with one would rather use a JF cause it's easier?

C: I'm based in Delve. My staging system is 1-Smeb, off Sakht. I can go from Vehan (a convenient highsec border location in Aridria) to Sahkt next to my staging system with a 4 and a 4.24 LY jump, incurring roughly three and a half hours fatigue. I can jump to Vehan from Sakht, fill up, log off my spare carrier alt for a few hours, then be back in my staging system with very little hassle.

Even if I had to add say an additional 4.5 LY jump from out of nowhere (for a total of three jumps), I could do all three jumps in around 20 minutes, turn off the comp for the night, and be finished with jump fatigue by the time I got home from work the next day. You don't have to let jump fatigue burn down between each jump, especially on a suitcase alt you can shelve for a while. And if I have two carrier alts I don't need on standby with no jump fatigue (which I do have), I can do the whole trip in 35ish minutes or less.

But I'm totally sure that the pain and effort of logging off an account for the night or for a few hours will mean that people other than the uber-rich PL bourgeoisie will find the slight extra effort in using a carrier absolutely prohibitive.

And they they wont use and abuse the **** out of said system. Nope. No chance of that.

This may be surprising, but the game does not revolve around PL.
Nor are balancing decision made based solely on if PL has better ways to do it.

I never expected this to be overly useful for you. It would be used primarily by all the other non PL poors running around for whom a 1 bil isk carrier + spare carrier alt + spare time is far more easy to come by than 20 JF alts making daiy runs.

Like i stated before - exclude specialized holds ( ore/fleet hangar etc) and carrier carrying capabilities are reduced by 1/3.

Just because of this we must go this way.