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
21919
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:20:00 -
[751] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.
The numbers are now corrected in the OP.
Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up. Bah! Now I have to update my spreadsheets and everything will look much better. Stop ruining our complaintsGǪ wait what? 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. |
Delhaven
Vicis Inter Astrum I'd Rather Be Roaming
45
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:21:00 -
[752] - Quote
Just to make sure I've got this straight for Freighters (all numbers are rough and relative to current):
Option 1, 3 x cargo rigs: +70K m3 cargo, -12K EHP Option 2, 3 x warp speed rigs: +0.78 AU/sec, -210K m3 cargo, -9K EHP Option 3, 3 x hull HP rigs: +29K EHP, -250K m3 cargo Option 4, 1 x hull HP rig, 2 x cargo rigs: -40K m3 cargo
This is a nerf. You can slightly improve one stat, at a high cost to one other, or at a decrease in multiple stats. Maintaining the status quo for defense means a drop in cargo. So the question is whether this is as intended, like it is with Jump Freighters. |
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:23:00 -
[753] - Quote
Ray Kyonhe wrote:Until someone will start to actually do what you refer to as infeasible and cut the prices, of course. You mean similar to how local prices on the street go down in the real world, when local trade barriers go up?
I don't think so... Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EVE-oconomy and o-kay for you. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2242
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:24:00 -
[754] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.
The numbers are now corrected in the OP.
Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.
Derath Ellecon wrote:Andrea Keuvo wrote:Odds that Fozzie posts in or even reads this thread again after today? Near zero I would bet. You really don't know Fozzie then do you? Given his history so far I'd bet a plex he keeps up on each and every one of the threads he has posted.
Knew I was right |
Dave Stark
5756
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:27:00 -
[755] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Knew I was right welcome to team 'i told you so', have a t-shirt. |
Theng Hofses
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:30:00 -
[756] - Quote
CargoholdIsotope/LJm3/isotope/LJDifference Nomad2700002700100 195000405048.14814815 Ark275625290095.043103455% 199000435045.747126445% Anshar281250310090.7258064510% 203000465043.6559139810% Rhea294375330089.2045454512% 207000495041.8181818215%
With the proposed changes the Rhea becomes even more uneconomical to use. As the premium to move a m3 with a Rhea increased from 12% to 15% over the Nomad. Also shouldn't the jump engines be equally efficient? |
Aiphona
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:31:00 -
[757] - Quote
Giullare wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
But yes, the fact that this is a small reduction in Jump Freighter power is completely intended.
Everytime u post something on this forum you bring bad news for players and dumb changes. With actual capital rig cargo cost a rhea will end up with approx 93% of its actual cargo with 200 mil isk for a pair of t1 rigs and approx 102% of its actual cargo with a couple of t2 rigs for a cheap price of 1,45 bil. Well next time you come up with a fresh new idea, write it on a toilet paper... someone will have a better use of it.
^^ this
You are forcing JF pilots to buy 2 T2 rigs for 1.48 BILLION to have the same cargospace. And then also nerfing the already slow aligning JF with an extra 16 seconds more align time. This means high-sec ganking will get even more easier! they dont even need to bump it anymore with these align-times.
This is just not acceptable. We already had to pay almost 7 Billion for a Ship with already limited cargo-space. Why add the extra costs??? Why nerf it?? |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6340
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:31:00 -
[758] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:Knew I was right welcome to team 'i told you so', have a t-shirt.
Hey, I thought we had agreed on a commemorative plaque? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21923
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:31:00 -
[759] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:Knew I was right welcome to team 'i told you so', have a t-shirt. Who do we lobby to get this in the NeX?
Aiphona wrote:You are forcing JF pilots to buy 2 T2 rigs for 1.48 BILLION to fly the SAME ship that aligns 16 seconds slower!! I had the same reaction first, but remember that they're giving base stats. Align time, in particular, drops dramatically once you factor in all the agility bonuses you collect on your way to JFs.
Look at this for where you end up with all-Vs. 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. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
430
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:34:00 -
[760] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. I haven't caught up on the entire thread yet (still working through page 19) but I wanted to quickly let you guys know that the mass values that were previously listed in the OP for freighters were a mistake on the forum post. We never changed the freighter mass values, and have no intention of preventing them from travelling through highsec wormholes.
The numbers are now corrected in the OP.
Ok, back to reading the rest of the thread. I'll let you guys know when I'm caught up.
It's good to see that you at least listen to the CSM advocate for WH's. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
156
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:35:00 -
[761] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:
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~
The most important part of what you said was rigs AND MODS!!.
Are we getting mods so we get the flexibility we wanted at the cost of paying for rigs and mods....NO! Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6340
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:40:00 -
[762] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Ammzi wrote:
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~
The most important part of what you said was rigs AND MODS!!. Are we getting mods so we get the flexibility we wanted at the cost of paying for rigs and mods....NO!
Why are you asking to get nerfed even further?
I mean, if they gave it even one lowslot they'd have to cut it's tank by about 40%. Nevermind everything else.
Or do you just not get it yet? You are not getting a net buff out of this. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Gumpy Bitterhawk
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:43:00 -
[763] - Quote
Loki Feiht wrote:I suppose this could set the stage for a new tech 2 freighter with a similar principle in mind to the old deep space transports (ie lower capacity but very tough)
So people need to have two 7billion isk ships to get their hauling (i mean work) done? Yeah sure that'll make it all easier lol. |
Dave Stark
5756
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:43:00 -
[764] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:You are not getting a net buff out of this. they are. they're only going to get it to 1 stat, not all of them. |
stoicfaux
4830
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:48:00 -
[765] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
The most important part of what you said was rigs AND MODS!!.
Are we getting mods so we get the flexibility we wanted at the cost of paying for rigs and mods....NO!
^^ this ^^
Modules mean we can make choices based on what we need to haul at the moment. Rigs, OTOH, are pretty inflexible.
WASABI: Warp Acceleration System Ancillary Boost Injected(Gäó)
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1766
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:49:00 -
[766] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Are we getting mods so we get the flexibility we wanted at the cost of paying for rigs and mods....NO!
I fear on behalf of all freighter pilots the day they can use a low slot module.
Take a watermelon, let it represent the ehp of a freighter. Now take an axe to the watermelon and you get to pick the smallest of the two sizes as your new freighter ehp after being given a low slot. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6340
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:52:00 -
[767] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
The most important part of what you said was rigs AND MODS!!.
Are we getting mods so we get the flexibility we wanted at the cost of paying for rigs and mods....NO!
^^ this ^^ Modules mean we can make choices based on what we need to haul at the moment. Rigs, OTOH, are pretty inflexible.
Pretty sure that was the point. That way you can't fit warp stabs. Or spend 700K with a DC 2 to vastly increase the effective hitpoints of the ship. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Buzz Dura
Epsilon Lyr Mordus Angels
9
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:52:00 -
[768] - Quote
without at least 2 T1 cargo rig, you can't transport CSAA or ihub...
|
Regan Rotineque
Arch Angels Assault Force The Kadeshi
325
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:54:00 -
[769] - Quote
what i dont understand is why you nerfed the freighters
could you not have left the stats the same and then built negative modifiers into the rigs?
that way i could fly the ship as is...OR..i could have real choice and nerf it myself
so i want extra hull - lose some cargo and align time i want more cargo - aling time that makes a dead snail look like an f1 racer pop a vap trimark on there - drop 10% cargo
i dont know what the actual penalties should be but you could make multiple penalties for using a specifc rig...sine its only capital rigs not many to modify...and then have those penalties affect only freighte/JF type ships
you could add specialized penalties to cap rigs for freighters and let US decide what is acceptable nerf
alternately you could do a fulll reblance and put slots on these and not just rigs
i think the best thing that can be done at this point is to withdraw these changes entirely and give this a rethink
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10165
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:56:00 -
[770] - Quote
....And I'm caught up.
Ok thanks to the goodposters in this thread so far. I'll definitely be taking the feedback here into account.
As usual, a friendly reminder that death threats are generally a suboptimal way of convincing someone of the correctness of your perspective.
I'm seeing some good feedback about the unique role of Jump Freighters meaning that they don't get much benefit from rigs other than cargo rigs, and this is indeed a problem that limits player choice. I'm going to bring up a few ways to help solve that issue with the other designers early next week.
I do want to clarify that although it's very possible that a lot of these numbers can change, we're not going to simply give JFs a gigantic buff to their cargoholds and call it a day. The fast movement of goods across the galaxy has its advantages and also its disadvantages, and we are not going to simply let power creep get out of control in this area.
I'll be continuing to read this thread, chatting with the CSM and the other designers here and I'm confident we'll get to the best possible version of these changes.
Thanks! Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21925
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:56:00 -
[771] - Quote
Regan Rotineque wrote:what i dont understand is why you nerfed the freighters
could you not have left the stats the same and then built negative modifiers into the rigs? GǪthereby nerfing all capital ships rather than just balance freighters? Yeah, no. 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. |
Gamer4liff
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
88
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 15:59:00 -
[772] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: I'm seeing some good feedback about the unique role of Jump Freighters meaning that they don't get much benefit from rigs other than cargo rigs, and this is indeed a problem that limits player choice. I'm going to bring up a few ways to help solve that issue with the other designers early next week.
Three words: Fuel Consumption Rigs or Jump Range Rigs
There's literally no other meaningful choices to be had. |
Gumpy Bitterhawk
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:00:00 -
[773] - Quote
Buzz Dura wrote:without at least 2 T1 cargo rig, you can't transport CSAA or ihub...
Nice point. And what about high tier ihub upgrades? You already need a freighter to carry some of these, cause jf's holds are too small for those. |
Lair Osen
92
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:01:00 -
[774] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Regan Rotineque wrote:what i dont understand is why you nerfed the freighters
could you not have left the stats the same and then built negative modifiers into the rigs? GǪthereby nerfing all capital ships rather than just balance freighters? Yeah, no.
I think he means that the Rigs have inbuilt drawbacks already so why is an extra massive nerf needed? |
Aiphona
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:01:00 -
[775] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:T1 rigs are easily enough to bring normal freighters above their current cargo values. Yes, but I fly a JF. I picked it because of its nippy align speed, good tank, and descent-enough cargo hold. I can restore one of those at a massive cost. Actually the tank on your JF is about the same as before, thanks to the extra resists. So you get one of the three for free! But yes, the fact that this is a small reduction in Jump Freighter power is completely intended.
Your not'"giving" anything if the tank is still the same. This is turning things around. All you did is TAKE the Agility and Cargospace away and make us pay 1.5 Billion to get 1 of those back. And that for a 7 Billion isk Ship.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
809
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:02:00 -
[776] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:....And I'm caught up.
Ok thanks to the goodposters in this thread so far. I'll definitely be taking the feedback here into account.
As usual, a friendly reminder that death threats are generally a suboptimal way of convincing someone of the correctness of your perspective.
I'm seeing some good feedback about the unique role of Jump Freighters meaning that they don't get much benefit from rigs other than cargo rigs, and this is indeed a problem that limits player choice. I'm going to bring up a few ways to help solve that issue with the other designers early next week.
I do want to clarify that although it's very possible that a lot of these numbers can change, we're not going to simply give JFs a gigantic buff to their cargoholds and call it a day. The fast movement of goods across the galaxy has its advantages and also its disadvantages, and we are not going to simply let power creep get out of control in this area.
I'll be continuing to read this thread, chatting with the CSM and the other designers here and I'm confident we'll get to the best possible version of these changes.
Thanks!
any thoughts on the JF tanking bonuses i mentioned? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
412
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:03:00 -
[777] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The big nullsec alliances weren't particularly fussed about industry being local GÇö they just wanted null industry to not be a thoroughly braindead proposition... .
Lets repeat what you said, your comment was actually trolling yourself, because improving industry in null sec means what? I know making it more effective to do it locally, so they have better refining and at last slots to do it.
The changes being imposed by Fozzie are in fact to make sure that null sec entities cannot use their new advantages to destroy hisec manufacturing because transport becomes an even bigger cost element and if the nullsec entities make their manufacturing closer to hisec then they can be disrupted.
While I don't like the impact for me, the actual change at the game balance level makes sense.
Don't be a turd and follow the herd Instead be a Hero at Hub Zero |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21925
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:04:00 -
[778] - Quote
Lair Osen wrote:I think he means that the Rigs have inbuilt drawbacks already so why is an extra massive nerf needed? It sounds like he wants more.
And still, that's an even simpler answer: because they have to keep the freighters balanced even after the bonuses that rigs will provide. 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. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
809
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:05:00 -
[779] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lair Osen wrote:I think he means that the Rigs have inbuilt drawbacks already so why is an extra massive nerf needed? It sounds like he wants more. And still, that's an even simpler answer: because they have to keep the freighters balanced even after the bonuses that rigs will provide.
are cargohold rigs stacking penalized? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
694
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:06:00 -
[780] - Quote
Gamer4liff wrote: Jump Range Rigs
unsubbing all accounts |
|
|
|
|
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 |