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) |
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:55:00 -
[421] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Alner Greyl wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Alner Greyl wrote:Dave Stark wrote:actually something i'm genuinely curious about.
since we've got a substantial amount of people saying how bad these changes will be; where were you all every time some one opened up a new thread asking for the exact change you're all being so negative about? Nobody expected such changes yes they did. that's why half the posts in this thread are people like me, tippia, and half of goons being rather smug. I expected nerf. I didn't expect such nerf. agility+tank+fuel cost+cargo don't you think that's too much for JF? fuel cost doesn't really have anything to do with this. that's happening regardless. it's also not happening until crius either.
Well, it does. One change can have interaction with other changes. Both intended and unintended. In this case it could be higher operational costs plus reduced cargo capacity resulting even more operational costs to move the same amount of cargo from point A to point F. |
Dave Stark
5690
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:58:00 -
[422] - Quote
Angelina Duvolle wrote:Dude can u please post one more time saying "but you asked for this" well, you did ask for this...
[don't say i never deliver] |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6314
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:58:00 -
[423] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote: Well, it does. One change can have interaction with other changes. Both intended and unintended. In this case it could be higher operational costs plus reduced cargo capacity resulting even more operational costs to move the same amount of cargo from point A to point F.
One presumes that is intended to stimulate more local markets, rather than Jita > all. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Paranoid Loyd
490
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:59:00 -
[424] - Quote
Angelina Duvolle wrote:Dave Stark wrote:actually something i'm genuinely curious about.
since we've got a substantial amount of people saying how bad these changes will be; where were you all every time some one opened up a new thread asking for the exact change you're all being so negative about? Dude can u please post one more time saying "but you asked for this" We haven't gotten the "told you so" message the first 16 times you have posted it. BTW to answer your silliness, when people asked for rigs or modules, they didn't think ccp would play their 29% nerf/30% buff game. Why? I don't know, can't tell you. Maybe they haven't been around that long? Maybe they believe in unicorns? I pretty much expected we'd get screwed.
ToldyousoBotGäó 1.01
There can not be enough "told you so" for such an epic failure on the community's part. Listen to the "trolls" you may think they are trolling you but there not necessarily trolling you just because you don't agree with them. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:00:00 -
[425] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote: Well, it does. One change can have interaction with other changes. Both intended and unintended. In this case it could be higher operational costs plus reduced cargo capacity resulting even more operational costs to move the same amount of cargo from point A to point F.
One presumes that is intended to stimulate more local markets, rather than Jita > all.
What is intended to stimulate more local markets? An increase in jump fuel consumption? Don't be silly. It's welfare for ice miners |
Reppyk
The Black Shell Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
572
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:01:00 -
[426] - Quote
I, for one, like the OP idea.
Now, should I put some agility rigs or warp speed rigs on my fenrir ? Hmm...
I would even say that JFs need another nerf. They had it coming. I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. -áI AM A LOWSEC GANKER, HIGHSEC SCUM, NULLSEC BASTARD, WORMHOLE INVADER. Welcome to, welcome to, welcome to my scramble. GÖÑ |
Dave Stark
5690
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:02:00 -
[427] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:It's welfare for ice miners heaven forbid mining actually generates a decent isk/hour. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3274
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:04:00 -
[428] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:So lets talk about the HPs of a max cargo rigged freighter, has anyone done the math on how many, catalysts / talos are required after the changes? Yes. Miniluv has and Burn Jita 4 will be both easier and with higher killmail values.
Assuming full cargo rig on a Fenrir:
You're losing 17500 * 1.25 = 21875 hp (multiplier from the engineering bonus) from the hull.
You're gaining 4375 * 1.25 = 5469 raw hp from shields. Resists effect this, so the damage type is important. Call the resist around 30% for hybrids. so 7110 hp gained from shields.
you're gaining 6750 * 1.25 (hull upgrades) hp, but losing some due to the rigs. So:
Total of: 28000 *1.25 * 0.95 *0.95 = 31588 hp total. The old hp worked out at 26,563 hp. So you're gaining 5025.5 hp from armour, affected by resists. again, call it 30% resists from hybrid damage, so a gain of 6533hp.
so, that's a total drop of around 8200 ehp.
Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
342
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:09:00 -
[429] - Quote
Hauling Hyena wrote: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...
Also, I just remembered about the penalties on rigs most likely to be used on freighters:
"This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's cargo capacity at the expense of armor amount." - same for the rest of Astro rigs (Agility, speed). except for Warp Speed rigs which receive a CPU penalty.
"This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's total armor hit points at the expense of max velocity."
"This ship modification is designed to increase shield capacity at the expense of increased signature radius."
CCP Fozzie wrote: We're planning on adding a series of Hull HP rigs, known as Transverse Bulkheads. These rigs will use the Armor Rigging skill, with a penalty to cargo capacity.
So.... if we want to hull tank, we'll be nerfing our cargo capacity even further. If we want to have either speed, agility or large cargo bay, we'll be forced to use Shield tank freighters due to nerf to Armor. What role does this leave for Armor Freighters? Super tanks with tiny bays?
Anyway you spin it, fact is the trade off with these rigs will be even greater than I previous realized. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6316
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:09:00 -
[430] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote: Well, it does. One change can have interaction with other changes. Both intended and unintended. In this case it could be higher operational costs plus reduced cargo capacity resulting even more operational costs to move the same amount of cargo from point A to point F.
One presumes that is intended to stimulate more local markets, rather than Jita > all. What is intended to stimulate more local markets? An increase in jump fuel consumption? Don't be silly. It's welfare for ice miners
Making operational costs higher. And I don't just mean for jump freighters, either. T1s take a hit, as if you fit for cargo the longer the journey the more risky.
The whole thing nicely incentivizes "closer to home" industrial movement. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
|
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:09:00 -
[431] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote:It's welfare for ice miners heaven forbid mining actually generates a decent isk/hour.
Minimum wage work? |
Angelina Duvolle
Homeworld Technologies
25
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:17:00 -
[432] - Quote
BTW, the theory that sticking it to freighter pilots is going to help decentralize the jita market is not even worthy of being called dumb. People will just do more afk hauling, that's all. This won't affect it in any way shape or form.
I am doubtful they even WANT to decentralize Jita. If they did, it would be childishly simple to do so with a sales/tax /credits system. |
Nex Killer
Drunk3n Industry
61
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:18:00 -
[433] - Quote
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. |
Digger Pollard
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:20:00 -
[434] - Quote
Steijn wrote:sorry, but that is nothing more than a massive nerf. +1 massively nerfed. My freighter alt is going for unsub. Probably the same for my friend's acc who were training for JF.
"Fozzie happens" (c). |
Dannar Hetoshi
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:21:00 -
[435] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Everybody! Speculate now in capital rigs! Anyone want to buy a Nomad?
Buying all Jump freighters for 4B isk each. |
Paranoid Loyd
491
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:22:00 -
[436] - Quote
Digger Pollard wrote:Steijn wrote:sorry, but that is nothing more than a massive nerf. +1 massively nerfed. My freighter alt is going for unsub. Probably the same for my friend's acc who were training for JF. "Player Ignorance Happens" (c).
FTFY
"PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
3433
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:26:00 -
[437] - Quote
I am now officially opening a freighter shelter for all orphaned freighters. If you unsub, contract the freighters to me and I will give them a nice cozy home in Tash-Murkon Prime. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
342
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:29:00 -
[438] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:actually something i'm genuinely curious about.
since we've got a substantial amount of people saying how bad these changes will be; where were you all every time some one opened up a new thread asking for the exact change you're all being so negative about?
Variations and choices are fine. Most of them are already included in the rigs. More cargo = less tank, more speed = less tank, more tank = less cargo etc.
Slight overall nerf would be fine if one T1 speed, cargo and tank rig reverted these changes to pre-patch. This however is a major nerf where if you want to get close to pre-patch #s you'll need to make even greater sacrifices in other areas including your wallet. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
139
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:29:00 -
[439] - Quote
Couldn't be happier.
Also I'm still training for a JF on one account and a Freighter on another. |
Galphii
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
229
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:36:00 -
[440] - Quote
The nerfs to freighters is a clever, subtle incentive to boost nullsec production along with the improvements to industry. Devious . I do recall the devs discussing how logistics is a little too easy a while back (csm notes I think), so that explains these changes. It's also a good way to make the universe just a little bit bigger. It's been far too easy to traverse the entire frickin' galaxy in a short span of time and if people start thinking and working locally, so much the better.
A good time to be a nullsec industrialist! X |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
151
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:52:00 -
[441] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Ive noticed something in this discussion, that those that didnt want freighters changes are now coming here in droves claiming all we wanted on freighters were rigs, I was heavily involved in those discussions and I; as well as you, know that that was not the limit of what we were suggesting.
We wanted flexiblity, just like the ORCA, rigs, highs, mids, lows, the whole deal, to now claim all we wanted is rigs is just cheap ass bullshit.
The costs for that change could have been mitigated by just reclassifying freighters as 'large' instead of capital since they walk like a large, talk like a large and act like a large (in that they can go into highsec) anyways.
But this takes creativity something that seems sorely lacking in this sadly comical 'solution'. even if those highs mids and lows would come with even more nerfs? making the rigs large may be one way to go. but most complaints at the prices seem to be because they want to fit T2 rigs. T1's are less than 100mil a piece in Hek.
Exactly, you nerf the ship down then let people rig / mod them as they seem fit......strangely like 99.9% of the rest of the ships are in this game. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Delhaven
Vicis Inter Astrum I'd Rather Be Roaming
44
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:54:00 -
[442] - Quote
CCP Seagull wrote:There are some people who make things work - they pre-fit ships for a fleet op, they run mega-spreadsheets for the industry production lines needed to equip the war effort, build tools to manage a corporation or command large fleets. Their activities enable others to have fun in EVE. So... these changes help these folks how?
To me, at least making them take large rigs would be a big help. What's the point of adding flexibility to ships, if the cost makes it too expensive to change them? Capital-sized rigs mean people will rig once, and never change them again. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21853
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:58:00 -
[443] - Quote
Cyran Reinhard wrote:Well, Jump Freighters are meant to jump....if you aren't Jumping, why do you have a JF? Because they have more EHP and travel faster than a normal freighter, both of which improve survival chances by a fair amount. They also don't sucker you into filling up on too much valuables, which is a bonus since it lets those main traits work their magic.
Actually, when I run the numbers (from the OP, which curiously enough don't always agree with EFT or Pyfa), it's not quite as bad as feared. 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. |
Kaahles
Jion Keanturi
27
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:03:00 -
[444] - Quote
Let's break it down shall we?
Now You can either go for Hull/Armor Whatever rigs that give you more EHP, thus better survivability in a gank. At the cost of decrased cargo capacity.
Or you can increase your cargo capacity but compared to before you lose survivability. If it works out however you can get stuff hauled faster and as we all know time is money. While you now can make more money / run and/or have an easier life it is more likely to lose stuff due to the EHP thingy.
I don't see a single frickn' probleme here. Risk vs Reward, working as intended.
And for JF's? TBH those nerfs don't go far enough as far as I am concerned because if you have half a functioning brain and know how the game works the likelyhood of losing your JF is pretty damn slim to almost nonexistent. Breaks the whole risk vs reward thing. |
Rittel
Band of Valence
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:08:00 -
[445] - Quote
Can you not just give freighters a sub-system slot with the option between 3 systems based around Cargo, Agility and Tank?
That way we can have the choice to fit how we see fit without having to rip out 2 T2 rigs or buy a whole new freighter!
|
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3144
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:14:00 -
[446] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Ive noticed something in this discussion, that those that didnt want freighters changes are now coming here in droves claiming all we wanted on freighters were rigs, I was heavily involved in those discussions and I; as well as you, know that that was not the limit of what we were suggesting.
We wanted flexiblity, just like the ORCA, rigs, highs, mids, lows, the whole deal, to now claim all we wanted is rigs is just cheap ass bullshit.
The costs for that change could have been mitigated by just reclassifying freighters as 'large' instead of capital since they walk like a large, talk like a large and act like a large (in that they can go into highsec) anyways.
But this takes creativity something that seems sorely lacking in this sadly comical 'solution'.
Sigh.
I was in most of those discussions. Every time I said "if you want customization, base stats will have to fall" I got responses like:
- GOON TEARS - U JUST DONT WANT IT TO BE HARDER TO GANK - WELL YOU WOULD BE AGAINST THIS YOU WANT EASY MODE GANKS - etc
No logic, no reason could make people asking for rigs/modules in those threads from seeing anything else than a future where they got to have their cake and eat it too. Now it's here, and exactly what was very very painfully obvious would happen, has happened.
You're a special case in that you're asking for more modules. Great! I'm not going to try to argue you out of it anymore; ask CCP for, say, 2 low slots. They will probably give you two low slots, and a 40% nerf to cargo, and hull HP, and some off the armour too. Then you can whine "but to get back to old cargo values I need to fit modules ... and they have drawbacks!"
And then we can do "told you so" all over again.
I couldn't be happier, we get to gank your freighters loaded with T2 rigs, and it's all your fault for asking for fitting.
As for my use of freighters? For what I use them for this is a very significant buff. "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1511
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:20:00 -
[447] - Quote
Rittel wrote:Can you not just give freighters a sub-system slot with the option between 3 systems based around Cargo, Agility and Tank?
That way we can have the choice to fit how we see fit without having to rip out 2 T2 rigs or buy a whole new freighter!
fit t1 rigs then. 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" |
Jack Earthfire
Everse Defense Initiative
14
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:24:00 -
[448] - Quote
Kaahles wrote:Let's break it down shall we?
Now You can either go for Hull/Armor Whatever rigs that give you more EHP, thus better survivability in a gank. At the cost of decrased cargo capacity.
Or you can increase your cargo capacity but compared to before you lose survivability. If it works out however you can get stuff hauled faster and as we all know time is money. While you now can make more money / run and/or have an easier life it is more likely to lose stuff due to the EHP thingy.
I don't see a single frickn' probleme here. Risk vs Reward, working as intended.
And for JF's? TBH those nerfs don't go far enough as far as I am concerned because if you have half a functioning brain and know how the game works the likelyhood of losing your JF is pretty damn slim to almost nonexistent. Breaks the whole risk vs reward thing.
Let's Break this down again: Internet Spaceships is serious Business and no Happy Happy Fluffy Fluffy La-La Land at all.
Me like it much. |
Rittel
Band of Valence
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:25:00 -
[449] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Rittel wrote:Can you not just give freighters a sub-system slot with the option between 3 systems based around Cargo, Agility and Tank?
That way we can have the choice to fit how we see fit without having to rip out 2 T2 rigs or buy a whole new freighter!
fit t1 rigs then.
I would still rather not have to waste hundreds of millions on rigs every time I need to refit for a slightly different role. You don't rip out the rigs on your dreadnoughts every time you have to increase range, damage or tank so why should freighter pilots have to? |
Axe Coldon
Coldon Enterprises Axion Bionics
30
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 00:31:00 -
[450] - Quote
What I don't get is why is a cargo nerf necessary to this change.
As of this moment, (May 18 00:24 eve time) a T2 Capital cargo rig in Jita is 724 mil. So 2 of them would be 1.448 bil. Why not leave the cargo capacity as it is for the JF, add the rig slots. If a person is willing to add 1.4 bil to a ship that already cost him 6 bil how does it hurt the game for him to have more cargo capacity.
A RHEA with 2 t2 rigs and no nerf would have been over 500k. So for those willing to spend the bucks they could move sov upgrades and even packaged orca's.
I don't see how that hurts the game. I don't see the logic of nerfing an already overpriced totally defenseless ship.
Plus if you dont nerf the cargo then more would be willing to forgo the 1.4 billion to add some tank..making a JF more fun instead of an overpriced Null Necessity . |
|
|
|
|
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 |