Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 00:42:44 -
[1] - Quote
Right now, freighter's safety is only ensure by carrying low value in high sec.
Even you do not auto-pilot, when your freighter carry 10B goods, you have a high chance get bumped and locked after some jumps. And you can do nothing, cannot warp and log off. You can just only wait there, wait the suicide ganging.
It is not a active style by auto-piloting and carrying 2B goods several times.
The best equipment is capital emergency hull energizer.
It will not make freighter's EHP much more and let freighter get harder to kill in low sec and null sec.
But a active freighter player can fight with those suicide attacker with this equipment.
With the help of a Nestor and several capital emergency hull energizers, you can even try to fight against suicide attackers several times. |
Paranoid Loyd
9672
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 00:44:27 -
[2] - Quote
"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix
Fix the Prospect!
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
45167
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 00:57:48 -
[3] - Quote
If you avoid being bumped in the first place, then there is no issue.
In any case, CCP are at some point implementing a 3 minute max bump timer, so unless the gank fleet is organised and ready, the get out of gaol free card will be automatic.
If you have an alt flying a Nestor, why not have one with webs?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3564
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 00:58:30 -
[4] - Quote
Shame on you.
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"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Sitting Bull Lakota
SBL Co
174
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 00:59:05 -
[5] - Quote
EvE's hard, man. |
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 01:04:31 -
[6] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Shame on you.
Yeah so just autopilot and play XBOX. |
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 01:23:42 -
[7] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:If you avoid being bumped in the first place, then there is no issue.
In any case, CCP are at some point implementing a 3 minute max bump timer, so unless the gank fleet is organised and ready, the get out of gaol free card will be automatic.
If you have an alt flying a Nestor, why not have one with webs?
3 minute max bump timer have not been implemented for half year. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
45167
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 01:29:10 -
[8] - Quote
Hato Totient wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:In any case, CCP are at some point implementing a 3 minute max bump timer, so... 3 minute max bump timer have not been implemented for half year. Yes, I know.
But since CCP has already committed to that (I know...I know...history is not good), then it's more likely that will be done before an emergency hull energizer is implemented instead.
In any case, the easiest solution is to use webs.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 01:30:02 -
[9] - Quote
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:EvE's hard, man.
It is really easy, skills are passive and for now freighter's equipment is all passive.
Setting all freighter autopilot and have fun in playing other games. |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
2754
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 01:52:45 -
[10] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:the easiest solution is to use webs.
Not empty quoting. |
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1055
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 04:09:24 -
[11] - Quote
Be careful, Loyd. Eventually your face will get stuck like that if you keep making the same one over and over again.
"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."
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3243
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 05:20:37 -
[12] - Quote
Hato Totient wrote:Right now, freighter's safety is only ensure by carrying low value in high sec.
If you ate going to open with such a bold lie at least let it be based on some level of truth. You can lose an empty freighter and you can keep a fully loaded one safe. Also what part of eve makes you think the safety of anything should be ensured ever?
BLOPS Hauler
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
2830
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 05:35:42 -
[13] - Quote
Wait, wasn't this exact same proposal just made a few days ago?
Indeed it was: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=494934
Ok, it has slipped to the second page but it is still polite to search to see if your (inane, in this case) idea has been discussed before to avoid breaking the forum rules with redundant threads like this one.
But to address the OP, still a -1 from me. Overloaded freighters more at risk? Sounds like that is working as intended. Are you trying to put the professional haulers out of business?
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 06:10:25 -
[14] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Wait, wasn't this exact same proposal just made a few days ago? Indeed it was: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=494934 Ok, it has slipped to the second page but it is still polite to search to see if your (inane, in this case) idea has been discussed before to avoid breaking the forum rules with redundant threads like this one. But to address the OP, still a -1 from me. Overloaded freighters more at risk? Sounds like that is working as intended. Are you trying to put the professional haulers out of business?
An error occurred while searching.
Tried several times. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4867
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 06:11:26 -
[15] - Quote
Hato Totient wrote:Setting all freighter autopilot and have fun in playing other games.
I think I know why you lose freighters, friend. |
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 06:15:34 -
[16] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Wait, wasn't this exact same proposal just made a few days ago? Indeed it was: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=494934 Ok, it has slipped to the second page but it is still polite to search to see if your (inane, in this case) idea has been discussed before to avoid breaking the forum rules with redundant threads like this one. But to address the OP, still a -1 from me. Overloaded freighters more at risk? Sounds like that is working as intended. Are you trying to put the professional haulers out of business?
And it is quite interesting that professional haulers just carry 1B goods and autopilot. It is not about professional. It is about how to play game actively. |
Hato Totient
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 06:38:59 -
[17] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Hato Totient wrote:Setting all freighter autopilot and have fun in playing other games. I think I know why you lose freighters, friend.
I have not lost any freighter in auto-piloting with 1B goods. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4869
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 06:43:09 -
[18] - Quote
Hato Totient wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Hato Totient wrote:Setting all freighter autopilot and have fun in playing other games. I think I know why you lose freighters, friend. I have not lost any freighter in auto-piloting with 1B goods.
And neither have the guys who actively fly with an awful lot more than that in their bays. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
2831
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 07:30:52 -
[19] - Quote
Hato Totient wrote:And it is quite interesting that professional haulers just carry 1B goods and autopilot. It is not about professional. It is about how to play game actively. They do now?
Red Frog doesn't have a 99.8%+ success rate from just autopiloting freighters around. The last company that tried that was destroyed pretty quickly.
And regardless, if it is your opinion that freighters are already too safe to be actively piloted, why are you proposing to make them even more safe to make things more interesting? You want to add a one-time invulnerability button to freighters that will just make gankers have to waste a second gank fleet thus doubling their cost to kill you, or alternatively with your refitting idea, completely invulnerable to being exploded in highsec.
Don't you think 99.8+% safe is safe enough? Do you really think making them 100% safe would make the game better?
If you want to make hauling more active and interesting, you should be proposing the opposite changes - make freighters more vulnerable so that players have to actively pilot them. Lower their HP or agility, or something to make it more risky out there to haul expensive loads. Red Frog and many others have figured out already how to operate with near perfect safety, so we know it can be done.
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3663
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 08:23:45 -
[20] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:They do now? Red Frog doesn't have a 99.8%+ success rate from just autopiloting freighters around. The last company that tried that was destroyed pretty quickly. And regardless, if it is your opinion that freighters are already too safe to be actively piloted, why are you proposing to make them even more safe to make things more interesting? You want to add a one-time invulnerability button to freighters that will just make gankers have to waste a second gank fleet thus doubling their cost to kill you, or alternatively with your refitting idea, completely invulnerable to being exploded in highsec. Don't you think 99.8+% safe is safe enough? Do you really think making them 100% safe would make the game better? If you want to make hauling more active and interesting, you should be proposing the opposite changes - make freighters more vulnerable so that players have to actively pilot them. Lower their HP or agility, or something to make it more risky out there to haul expensive loads. Red Frog and many others have figured out already how to operate with near perfect safety, so we know it can be done. RFF's 'safety' is due to the fact that they operate under such low value conditions in a higher value market making them less valuable targets. If the entire market ever moved to match them, they would take significantly greater losses. I would also point at the virtual doubling of their failed contracts in that information you linked showing that they are taking significantly greater losses.
Not that I'm in favour of this particular proposal under current rules, but currently other than not landing 15km off gate, you basically aren't rewarded for active piloting, and alts should not be required for gameplay.
What needs to happen is all industrial ships (Including barges) get real fittings comparable to similar class combat ships, including getting some (unbonused) turret/launcher slots. And then the concord timer changed to be a couple of minutes. Which means active combat skills actually matter, things are less certain because there is more time for people to intervene, and everyone gets to have the fun of a good couple of minute scrap. The timer being a couple of minutes would also mean that a freighter could use the emergency hull energiser without breaking the game, since it would only be a fraction of the time a gank has to happen. (Concord spawns should also be replaced with an unstoppable remote self destruct triggered by concord instead, so people on grid don't lag out to 100 concord ships suddenly spawning like happens in larger ganks or smart bomb ganks) |
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
2831
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 09:02:18 -
[21] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:RFF's 'safety' is due to the fact that they operate under such low value conditions in a higher value market making them less valuable targets. If the entire market ever moved to match them, they would take significantly greater losses. I would also point at the virtual doubling of their failed contracts in that information you linked showing that they are taking significantly greater losses. (1 in 5,000 jumps is the rough RFF loss rate calculating from their failed contracts to jumps ratio & rounded up a little to allow for some actual fails without getting ganked, contrary to the BS numbers Baltec keeps spewing, which if you consider a there and back between trade hubs is 50+ jumps for most of them is actually fairly common).
Not that I'm in favour of this particular proposal under current rules, but currently other than not landing 15km off gate, you basically aren't rewarded for active piloting, and alts should not be required for gameplay. Of course flying with a reasonable load is part of that safety Red Frog achieves. That part is working as intended. There is significant risk associated with going above a certain threshold as it makes you a valuable target to pirates. Red Frog recognizes this, and along with a bunch of other things, uses it to be nearly perfectly safe operating in highsec.
The point is that you can, with moderate effort and being judicious, haul with near 100% safety in highsec. Freighters are not broken as some would have you believe. There are professionals who can and do move stuff around with near impunity in highsec and make a living at it. Yes, they do lose the odd (very odd - less than 1 in 500 contracts) freighter from time-to-time, but that is suppose to be how it works in this no-where-is-100%-safe game CCP has designed.
Now, clearly as you say if everyone always stuffed 10B ISK into every freighter, or freighters were made much weaker those safety numbers would completely change. Sure, so what? That is the balancing act CCP has made and where we are today. But no matter what numbers CCP gives to the various variables that determine safety, there are always going to be competent, conservative haulers who will only lose something if very unluckly, and reckless, lazy haulers who shove too much into their hauler and use autopilot to go play Xbox. If the numbers were such that either extreme wasn't possible, then something would be broken, but I don't see any evidence of that at all. Competent haulers can make themselves almost perfectly safe, while incompetent haulers are at risk and regularly suffer the consequences of their decisions.
Clearly we shouldn't give those lazy haulers a button to save their freighter when they glance over from their Xbox game and see that they are being bumped. I agree with you (and the OP) though that hauling could be more active and from just looking at the numbers of how rare it is to lose a sub-billion freighter, everyone should just use autopilot all the time (perhaps with a quick look at zkill first to see if either of the remaining two gank groups are operating then). I have floated various ideas in the past for alternative interdiction mechanics to aggress freighters that might provide for more escalation and make for more interesting fights (other than a 20s DPS race) and options for the defender to get assistance, but I won't bother rehashing these now. Let's all just agree that the OP's idea, at least in isolation, is not a very good one for her stated objective of making hauling a more active profession.
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3663
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 10:33:09 -
[22] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Yes, they do lose the odd (very odd - less than 1 in 500 contracts) freighter from time-to-time, but that is suppose to be how it works in this no-where-is-100%-safe game CCP has designed. Just for one last actual statistic though I agree with your summation of the ops statistics. (& wouldn't be surprised if they were an alt of the previous thread maker)
500 Contracts only just makes the hauler 1 billion isk on average (19.5 averaged). If they lose a Freighter every 500 contracts (They actually fail 1 in every 365 contracts, but not every single fail will be a gank) then the only isk they are making is the insurance money & any tips they get on average. Except then they also lose the collateral of the cargo they got ganked with. Looking at their membership numbers, it's obvious they are bleeding members & that they are charging more per jump to cover the increased ganking going on. And this is the safest supposedly best hauler group who their own figures say they are barely making isk. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18294
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 11:02:37 -
[23] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Black Pedro wrote:Yes, they do lose the odd (very odd - less than 1 in 500 contracts) freighter from time-to-time, but that is suppose to be how it works in this no-where-is-100%-safe game CCP has designed. Just for one last actual statistic though I agree with your summation of the ops statistics. (& wouldn't be surprised if they were an alt of the previous thread maker) 500 Contracts only just makes the hauler 1 billion isk on average (19.5 averaged). If they lose a Freighter every 500 contracts (They actually fail 1 in every 365 contracts, but not every single fail will be a gank) then the only isk they are making is the insurance money & any tips they get on average. Except then they also lose the collateral of the cargo they got ganked with. Looking at their membership numbers, it's obvious they are bleeding members & that they are charging more per jump to cover the increased ganking going on. And this is the safest supposedly best hauler group who their own figures say they are barely making isk.
They are not bleeding members due to ganks, they are falling in line with the rest of EVEs numbers.
Other organisations to look at would be from the big null alliances. All of them run out of jita and in all of my years I have never lost an order. Equally my own freighter is now 7 years old and had no attempts made on it. Even comparing zkill to the number of freighters operating in highsec shows the number of freighters getting ganking is tiny.
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
2831
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 11:13:05 -
[24] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Black Pedro wrote:Yes, they do lose the odd (very odd - less than 1 in 500 contracts) freighter from time-to-time, but that is suppose to be how it works in this no-where-is-100%-safe game CCP has designed. Just for one last actual statistic though I agree with your summation of the ops statistics. (& wouldn't be surprised if they were an alt of the previous thread maker) 500 Contracts only just makes the hauler 1 billion isk on average (19.5 averaged). If they lose a Freighter every 500 contracts (They actually fail 1 in every 365 contracts, but not every single fail will be a gank) then the only isk they are making is the insurance money & any tips they get on average. Except then they also lose the collateral of the cargo they got ganked with. Looking at their membership numbers, it's obvious they are bleeding members & that they are charging more per jump to cover the increased ganking going on. And this is the safest supposedly best hauler group who their own figures say they are barely making isk. I won't claim to know anything about Red Frog's finances, but according to their reports they made 100% more profit per contract in 2015 than 2014 (20M vs. 10M). The only failed 50% more contracts in 2015 than 2014, although it is true they had about 1/3 less the number of contracts meaning they did experience more losses as a fraction of their income.
I am not sure any of this is informative though as their profit is completely determined by the other players (clients), their competitors and other factors (like PLEX prices) that affect their operating costs. But we can say is that over the last years they have failed a tiny fraction of their contracts indicating that indeed it is mechanically possibly to fly freighters very safely:
2015: 0.27% 2014: 0.11% 2013: 0.12% 2012: 0.18%
In fact, in the 2012 report they broke that down further and showed that only 89/194 contracts failed because of suicide ganks, and of those 89 there were only 25 freighters lost because they carry multiple contracts. So these numbers likely over-estimate the risk by 2 or 3 fold although maybe they have changed their practices not to carry multiple contracts. We also just had a significant buff to freighter safety in March that it will be interesting to see how it affects Red Frog's business in 2016.
But I don't really want to debate how Red Frog is doing as it is beside the point. I am just using it as an example of data we have that shows how safe freighters can be. No, not how safe all freighters are as clearly pilots that AFK overloaded freighters through ganking hotspots are going to have nowhere near the same safety record, but how a conservatively loaded, escorted freighter can be.
And that's how the game should be designed. You should be able to do something mostly safe if you spend some effort and show some skill navigating the rules of the game, and you should be less safe if you don't spend the effort or understand the game, or cut corners to save time or expenses protecting your stuff. We can argue about the exact numbers, but overall we still are in the zone where this is true and freighter safety is largely influenced by player behaviour.
There is the issue raised by the OP that the higher you raise the bar to attack, the less sense it makes to actively take steps to protect your freighter, but that isn't going to be solved as long as a CONCORD-enforced DPS race is the only way to pirate in highsec. Certainly not by the idea in the OP.
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1339
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 11:36:58 -
[25] - Quote
Duplicate thread is duplicate.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=494934&find=unread
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
149
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 13:18:58 -
[26] - Quote
Yes, let's make freighters nigh-invulnerable in hisec in a game about risk vs. reward. Brilliant idea, OP. /s
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |