Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 94 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21830
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:45:00 -
[301] - Quote
Ptrum wrote:Why cant ccp just give freighters and JF low and mid slots and lower the cargo. *sigh*
Look at the limited amount of things you can do with rigs, and the limited bonuses they provide. Then look back at the OP to see what they had to do to accommodate those few options and small:ish boosts and still maintain a semblance of balance.
Now look at the massive amount of things you can do with low and midslots and the size of the bonuses they provide. Then imagine what they would have to do to the hulls to accommodate what you just asked them to unlockGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
chef Shi
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:45:00 -
[302] - Quote
First when i heard about that we where getting rigs for freigths i was so happy..
now i just wish we diden't get them this si a MAJOR nerf to freigthers over all.. giving us less tank, less agility and less cargo space..
when is there ever gonna be any love for the freigthers,?
|
Missss Deathwhisper
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:45:00 -
[303] - Quote
So CCP why would you not give Freighters and JFs a real fitting loadout. Give them low, mid, high and rig slots, so you can pick how your Freighter or JF are setup, Cargo, speed or tank setup. If you pick to go all cargo setup with expanded cargohold t2 and t1 cargo rigs, you should have the same amount of cargo as the Freighters or JFs got currently and if you pick to take t2 cargo rigs then should you get a bigger boost those 4% you are talking about. ofc if you pick to go tank or speed then should you not have the same amount of cargo as you have currently, so you either get to boost your cargo but sacrifice speed and tank or you pick tank and sacrifice cargo and speed. |
Jubei Hangoon
Kenshin. Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:46:00 -
[304] - Quote
I think the point of this nerf to JF is to motivate people to manufacture more in 0.0. Yes, the fixed and variable costs are going up, yes the risk is going up. The idea seems to be to motivate EVE players to manufacture more in 0.0.
But there is a fatal flaw to this strategy! Currently one enterprising and skilled person can create logistic lines and buy/sell orders to support a large team of PvP players in 0.0, but in order to create the kind of T2 production to support even a small alliance requires several highly motivated, resourced, and skilled industrialists who can hold with some stability a set of moons, miners, and blueprints and STILL need a logistical line to empire for datacores. In my experience this is prohibitive for all but the most expansive of alliances.
If CCP wants to break the tether to Empire, break it and be done with the current invention/moon mining system. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
3430
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:48:00 -
[305] - Quote
Does that mean that there are now job openings for miners and industrialists in null-sec? Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
34
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:48:00 -
[306] - Quote
What is the problem with been able to move Packaged Capital ships in empire in T2 rigged Freighters? Give them a flag so you cannot unpackage them (the caps) in empire stations and bam new high value targets in empire when people are trying to move a packaged JF in a normal Freighter so it can be sold in jita or something. I see nothing wrong with this if thereGÇÖs no way to unpackage them.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21830
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:49:00 -
[307] - Quote
chef Shi wrote:when is there ever gonna be any love for the freigthers,? When there's need for it.
Right now, there really isn't any, but people kept chanting for the ability to choose even though it was blatantly obvious that fitting choice would come at a huge cost.
Missss Deathwhisper wrote:So CCP why would you not give Freighters and JFs a real fitting loadout Because it would make them awful, and look how well the very small nerf required to give them rigs is received.
Tappits wrote:What is the problem with been able to move Packaged Capital ships in empire in T2 rigged Freighters? Give them a flag GǪbecause if your solution cascades into having to solve more and more problems the more you're trying to fix, what you're doing isn't a solution but an endless source of complication. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
608
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:49:00 -
[308] - Quote
Tappits wrote:What is the problem with been able to move Packaged Capital ships in empire in T2 rigged Freighters? Give them a flag so you cannot unpackage them (the caps) in empire stations and bam new high value targets in empire when people are trying to move a packaged JF in a normal Freighter so it can be sold in jita or something. I see nothing wrong with this if thereGÇÖs no way to unpackage them.
This is a terrible idea. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Allison A'vani
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
108
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:51:00 -
[309] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Allison A'vani wrote:This is exactly why I have been saying for the 7 posts I made before that one, that these changes are bad to begin with and CCP should leave JF and freighters the way they are. Ok. Fair enough. It's hard to keep track of who says what. And anyway, the changes they've done would not be sufficient to make up for a lowslot since you can do a whole lot more with one than you can with three rig slots, so my main point stands: no, it would not be an acceptable trade.
BTW as a t2 ship, JF will only get 2 rigs. That is why this change is so brutal of a nurf for JF. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
34
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:51:00 -
[310] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tappits wrote:What is the problem with been able to move Packaged Capital ships in empire in T2 rigged Freighters? Give them a flag so you cannot unpackage them (the caps) in empire stations and bam new high value targets in empire when people are trying to move a packaged JF in a normal Freighter so it can be sold in jita or something. I see nothing wrong with this if thereGÇÖs no way to unpackage them.
This is a terrible idea.
Were is the constructive criticism? your a terrible idea.
|
|
Aliventi
Southern Cross Empire Flying Dangerous
700
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:52:00 -
[311] - Quote
Frighters and JF were better off before these changes. Keep our rigs so we can keep our freighters and JFs. Join [FIGL] Flying Dangerous Today! |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3509
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:52:00 -
[312] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:The whole drama is based on bad CCP communication. They should stand out and say "we don't like everything built in Sobaseki, sold in Jita and moved to everywhere else. We want you to build stuff locally. Hauling from Jita is meant to be an auxiliary source of items. Because of this, we nerf Freighters and JFs to the ground, like we did with AFK-sentry fleets and AoE Doomsdays"
Again: I like this change and I believe it will revitalize industry in nullsec, which is very much needed. As usual you're spouting nonsense. "Nerfing JFs and freighters into the ground" as you're saying would be the nerfs, without the rigs to allow the choice of what you want back. And even if they did do that, it in and of itself wouldn't revitalize nullsec industry; that's all going to be the Crius changes, with zero contribution from the stuff in this thread. You're also ignoring the fact that the Crius design assumes null industry will continue to be based on imported minerals (which is why they made the changes to compressed ore) and that regional ice and moon products are a thing that must be imported and exported as well, making some kind of heavy lift transport capacity a requirement.
May I suggest you return to your blog where you can hide behind comments approval when someone points out the holes in your reasoning? Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21830
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:54:00 -
[313] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Were is the constructive criticism? your a terrible idea. What problem are you trying to solve by creating a new problem that needs to be solved, and how is solving the first worth the headache you just created?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1505
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:56:00 -
[314] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote:baltec1 wrote:[
Its to stop us shipping capitals into jita. Increasing repackaged values of capital ships and sov upgrade mods is one sql query away.
so why not just allow freighters to carry 20mil m3 and make repackaged capitals 21mil m3?
Because theres a point where logistics becomes too easy and transforms competition from effort and risk taking to simply having a skillbook trained or not. With across the board increases to capacity with no trade offs, importing items becomes easier, safer and faster, and that means it becomes cheaper and prices level across the galaxy, and that means the rewards are less for anyone who does any work.
its a nerf to ppl who set up shop in a certain location to build and sell certain items. its a nerf to ppl who pay attention and use escorts when they haul. its a nerf to inter-regional traders.
the real beneficiaries of making all this easier to do is ppl who dnt really pay attention to where they set up shop, cant be bothered to check regional prices and afk haul.
you want things to be harder, because u want to be rewarded for ur efforts and u want ur competition to lose out for being lazy or dying in a fire because hes bad at space ships. 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""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
251
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:58:00 -
[315] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:It doesn't. I also believe that is the point; 0.0 was never meant to be homogeneous with no incentive to take and own other regions. OTEC only worked because various entities across the map worked together. If you want the ability to obtain and control certain resources without needing to blue/NIP most of the map, then it will need to be regional.
And... that means... that you will always have to import... because someone else controls the production materials... If that importing is more difficult or has a high barrier to entry (which is what the fuel and freighter changes create) then you are NOT going to be producing in null- you're going to be doing so near your source for the materials...
Quote:Yup. This is a valid complaint. The difference in our opinions is that I am of the belief we are in the growing-pains stage of change (andd embracing it) and you're yelling down the attempt to affect any change at all. You can't just make importing completely non-viable overnight, you need to slowly make changes, which then make organisations do a top-down evaluation and conclude "the time has come for us to seriously look at meeting our material needs locally".
Batolemaeus said it eloquently enough already:
Quote:Don't you think enabling 0.0 and especially deep 0.0 ability to produce locally should come before nerfing importing?
I try to have a realistic outlook on things, and with the glacial speed of CCP, I'd prefer they fix A before they nerf B which A depends on.
Change away as much as you want, but make sure players actually have a way to adapt. There's no way not to import currently, so fix that, then hurt importing if it hasn't already diminished by itself.
Quote:A lot more changes need to happen between here and there, but christ, don't be that guy wailing against all change, and definitely don't be that guy if you're only doing it because you don't personally think the outcome benefits you.
You seem to think continuing to attack me because you're butthurt about something I said on twitter is at all a good argument. I've not mentioned benefits or injuries to myself at any point, yet you've spent all but a small portion of this last post attacking me or my affiliation rather than having anything to say.
They have their incentives and approach to their goal set up backwards, which is what I've said from the very first post. That's far different from blindly hating it because it doesn't serve me. |
Buzz Dura
Epsilon Lyr Mordus Angels
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:59:00 -
[316] - Quote
for those who missed some figures... |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
3430
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:59:00 -
[317] - Quote
Aliventi wrote:Frighters and JF were better off before these changes. Keep our rigs so we can keep our freighters and JFs. You don't understand. The rigs are the boost we get on top of these nerfs. Without rigs, you'd only have the nerf left. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
342
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:59:00 -
[318] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:SeeGǪ there was a reason why I was against rigs on freighters from the very startGǪ T2 capital rigs and a significant reduction in survivability requried and/or speed to get them back to where they were. Gee thanks. T1 rigs are easily enough to bring normal freighters above their current cargo values.
They do, but from my understanding they're losing out in the other areas, (Speed, HP for JF & HP for freighters).
Personally this won't affect my corp much but I can see how this can be a major PITA for organized groups with specific cargo restrictions like alliance logistics, red frog etc. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1811
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:01:00 -
[319] - Quote
mynnna wrote: also ignoring the fact that the Crius design assumes null industry will continue to be based on imported minerals (which is why they made the changes to compressed ore) and that regional ice and moon products are a thing that must be imported and exported as well, making some kind of heavy lift transport capacity a requirement. So basically they're making logistics more of a dull tedious pita of a chore for ....what exactly....good gameplay? |
Iski Zuki DaSen
Icarus Academy
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:01:00 -
[320] - Quote
HEy U CCP Devs are you ****ing Crazy?
T2 capital rigs to be able to do what i was doing earlier in 1 or 2 aspects of my JF and Freighter?
IMO t1 rigs = old performance t2 better performance
and when u are gona change that silly +5 max velosity bonus on freighters??
|
|
Labrena
Muppets Released Fedaykin.
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:04:00 -
[321] - Quote
I don't see the need for the nerf to cargo capacity on the ships.
You've already shown that you can restrict what goes into bays, so you simply make it so packaged capital ships and station containers cannot be put into courier contracts and into the cargo bay's of freighters.
People were not asking for rigs to be added to freighters, to get an overall nerf without spending another 1-2b on their ships.
It really seems like no thought at all was put into these changes.
You could be better served making a sub-freighter line, with the 500k cargo line, and letting the current freighters the option to ADD more cargo space or EHP or agility/speed. |
Hauling Hyena
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:05:00 -
[322] - Quote
Niko Lorenzio wrote:Personally this won't affect my corp much but I can see how this can be a major PITA for organized groups with specific cargo restrictions like alliance logistics, red frog etc.
Thank you... this is a major ****-up for our business, so what this is saying that if we want to stick to our 860k m-¦ we need to use freighters that, instead of 1.2b cost 2b including rigs and will take even LESS (it's around 400m right now) ships to gank...
Yeah, thank you CCP... |
Jack Mancetti
Rennfeuer Curatores Veritatis Alliance
43
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:05:00 -
[323] - Quote
Well Mr.Fuzzie i know now what you and CCP want from us OUR ISK .
Cool , now we can fit expensive rigs on our expensiv Hauler and will lose it again and again and again against 15 destroyer. lemme see the golden donkey which ***** us the golden isk for it?
Sorry but did u realy play eve . . i dont think so
|
Caroline Grace
Grace Stellar Conveyance Inc.
523
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:05:00 -
[324] - Quote
I'm in the freighter business actively for over two years now and I have to say something about these changes. I don't agree with them, while I really like the idea of being able to modify my freighter by more or less tank/cargo/speed.
Freighter hauling is a very dull gameplay and I was hoping for some rebalance ideas that would actually reflect that. However, what I read from these changes, it is actually the opposite. Consider; every freighter pilot will now have to pay extra ~200m extra ISK for rigs to even activate this rebalance at the first place. This will not only annoy all freighter pilots, it will also raise the overall price of a freighter, raise the courier rewards to balance this ISK sink, annoy contract customers and shake the business all around. And angry customers - not good!
While it is true you will be able to rig your freighter to the original state (for 200m) and getting extra ~4% cargohold capacity (while losing agility by adding the hull rigs), in the freighter world, the 4% cargohold capacity bonus means nothing and agility means everything. This business is all about speed, all about collateral numbers and all about round cargo capacity numbers when comes to hauling. I know this. I do this every day. It does not justify the extra 200m cost into every of your freighters from now on.
The other possibilities how to rig your freighters are good: being able to carry more and faster, but with less tank, this is in the true spirit of EVE and I would love pay for them if I would choose I would like to use them.
However, freighter business is already an extremely expensive business and these changes forces every freighter pilot to spend extra 200m to even enjoy the Kronos release and get either the same freighter as before or modify their freighter into weak/strong hybrid they might not even want.
Please reconsider these changes. Hauling is the backbone of every profession in EVE and freighter gameplay itself is a very dull and very soul-draining profession to do. I didn't and don't expect some massive gameplay overhaul for freighters, but at least do not hurt this unique, important and somewhat soul sensitive profession by forcing players to sink hundreds of millions ISK into getting the same slighty nerfed, or modified and overall still nerfed, freighter. Thank you. |
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
9
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:06:00 -
[325] - Quote
As much as I'd like Gevlon's vision of CCP's vision for the future to be correct, I don't think it is.
I feel that this will mean a minor but significant nerf to all F and JF hauling, and that people will still (sadly) build in Sobaseki, sell in Jita, buy in Jita and Jump to null. I also feel that the CCP design team probably already suspect that this is what will happen.
It's going to mean higher prices for everyone, PLEX inflation, and most importantly, no new exciting pioneering gameplay for anyone with the exception of those that do freighter ganks.
I would have preferred to see a more radical change to the way that logistics chains could be handled.
I would love to see more people do industry outside highsec but I fear we will remain in a quiet and cold minority.
This change feels like a band aid rather than a well thought out change for the new New Eden economic landscape.
CCP, you have a new release cycle with a new Lead Games Designer with a new vision for the future. Take this opportunity to freeze these changes and consider more carefully how these changes could integrate with your vision of industry in the future. Veteran players are looking for new challenges, and new and smaller scale players just getting into these ships will feel the nerfs the hardest.
Once you have the complete picture of how to change the industrial landscape of EVE then by all means give us these nerfs.
|
Soldari Orion
Capital Industries Research And Development Fidelas Constans
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:07:00 -
[326] - Quote
Nope. Nope nope nope.
Devs, you're adding choice, where choice does not add to the gameplay of hauling. There is no need for a game mechanic for choice of ships when it comes to freighters and hauling.
These changes do not help hauling, and are not going to provide meaningful content; the only reason that I can imagine they're being done is change for the sake of change. People said they wanted rigs because they wanted a choice on top of their current use, not choice in order to get to their current use |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1812
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:12:00 -
[327] - Quote
Going back to standard freighters, has anyone ran the numbers for a comparison of an align/agility rigged freighter as compared to current freighter values? |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6301
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:12:00 -
[328] - Quote
Soldari Orion wrote: These changes do not help hauling, and are not going to provide meaningful content; the only reason that I can imagine they're being done is change for the sake of change. People said they wanted rigs because they wanted a choice on top of their current use, not choice in order to get to their current use
They wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted to get straight buffed when the ship class was in a perfectly fine state of balance before.
But that's not how EVE works. As they were repeatedly told, and as is now demonstrated. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
504
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:13:00 -
[329] - Quote
Buzz Dura wrote:for those who missed some figures...
What about Fenrir and Providence?
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21831
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:14:00 -
[330] - Quote
Labrena wrote:I don't see the need for the nerf to cargo capacity on the ships.
You've already shown that you can restrict what goes into bays, so you simply make it so packaged capital ships and station containers cannot be put into courier contracts and into the cargo bay's of freighters. That would require the construction of a completely new special hold that wouldn't be affected by the rigs anyway. So if you want to do what people wanted to do with rigs, you now have to create new rigs to alter special holds, which will alter the balance of other shipsGǪ
See how trying to solve your problem cascades into multiple new problems? Why not just make it easy and reduce cargo space to make sure that the end result doesn't get too high? What is the value of getting so much higher cargo holds and how does it outweigh the headache created by all the problems it spawns? Oh, and what makes it a good idea to have those huge cargo holds to begin with? Restrictions are valuable in the decisions they create.
Quote:People were not asking for rigs to be added to freighters, to get an overall nerf without spending another 1-2b on their ships. They rather were and were told as much on every occasion. They just chose to ignore the obvious downsides of what they were asking for.
Quote:It really seems like no thought at all was put into these changes. It looks like a lot of thought went into them. They even managed to reduce the required nerfs to more palatable levels than one would have expected. No, the problem is that little thought went into the demand that freighters be given rigs, since that's where the problem lies. We will never get back our excellent-at-everything freighters now that people have gotten their wish of being able to choose what their ship should be good at. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 94 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |