| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Adrastos Volos
   |
Posted - 2006.02.10 21:06:00 -
[241]
good idea!
/signed
|
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.02.15 21:02:00 -
[242]
Edited by: SentryRaven on 15/02/2006 21:01:55
Double post
Include Small Freighters into EVE |
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.02.15 21:02:00 -
[243]
I heard rumors, CCP was going to take this into consideration for next patch? Can someone confirm that? or at least give me more to dream about? :)
Include Small Freighters into EVE |
PC5
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 14:04:00 -
[244]
Edited by: PC5 on 09/04/2006 14:04:12
Signed! Id like to see something between freighter and transport ship.
|
Phoenix Jones
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 15:25:00 -
[245]
As long as they cannot pickup jetcans (detering bot mining), then I'm game for it. A middleman freighter isn't a bad idea.
|
ragewind
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 00:13:00 -
[246]
Edited by: ragewind on 10/04/2006 00:13:51
 Originally by: Phoenix Jones
As long as they cannot pickup jetcans (detering bot mining), then I'm game for it. A middleman freighter isn't a bad idea.
i want a ship a corp can use to do corp space mining without haveing transoprts that have so little space of shilding that you need about 10 pilots to gard them and a barge.
im hateing the way genuine players are gimped due to macrominers that ccp says are few and far between in there las vagus interview but are blatenly a real problem due to the nonstop gimping of mining and tradeing ships they need to fix the code work out a way of stoping the macro gimps
fix eves industrial sector!
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319618&page=1 |
DarkSith
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 17:23:00 -
[247]
Signed OVER AND OVER :)
|
ragewind
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 19:13:00 -
[248]
Originally by: DarkSith
Signed OVER AND OVER :)
and signed again
fix eves industrial sector!
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319618&page=1 |
Mihail d'Amour
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 20:14:00 -
[249]
Originally by: Thecle Vifargent
I dont think changing the existing T2 transport ship would help. The T2 are very usefull in the way they are (deep space for non-gallente 20k m3 + transportation and blockade to travel in low secure systems).
Perhaps another T2 indus type, but the actual one are really usefull when you use them.
Anyway we still need a mid class transport ship between freighter and these T2 (or iteron 5)...
Actually, the T2 aren't that much better. They are OK for moving about mid-sec space (.1 to .4) in that the blockade runner can hold off a few moments of fire and one weak tackler and the larger ship is a touch larger and can tank a few moments of NPC or player fire if outfitted correctly. But neither is very effective in 0.0 where a blockade means a bubble or interdictor making the blockade-runner useless and the incoming fire is quite heavy for the deep-space transport's limited defense. Even the freighters are a drain on a corp, since you have to have a fleet to guard them.
It would be nice to see both a larger sized hauler for mid-high sec and a genuine blockade runner introduced for 0.0 space.
----------------------------------------------
In nomine Domine, quod erat malum |
Drizit
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 20:26:00 -
[250]
You have systems even in highsec that have loads of ore but are left unmined. Why? Simply because it takes too long for a hauler of the current size even to make a single jump and come back for the next load. The result is that the miner has to stop frequently to allow the hauler to catch up. Therefore the belt is not econmically viable to mine. Two Covetors in one of these belts would require 4 haulers to maintain a constant, uninterrupted flow where two haulers in a system with stations would keep up with the same two Covetors. Any miner would rather have 3 Covetors working a belt with 3 haulers taking it out rather than 2 Covetors and 4 haulers.
Now take it a step further with 0.0 where the same hauler may have to make 3 or even 4 jumps to the nearest station. Now you may need 3 or 4 haulers for a single Covetor. Once again, these resources are infrequently mined if at all. Mining in 0.0 also requires significant defence so using personnel to haul takes away those who could be used to fly defence. Either way it's not economically viable.
This is just one reason for having a larger freighter.
The tradeoff?
Simply that a large hauler in 0.0 would have to be guarded. A big and slow moving ship would be easy pickings. but again, a normal hauler would also have to be guarded. 0.0 has it's own dangers that are inherant no matter what ship you fly.
In Highsec, the tradeoff is going to be the solo player who decides to use a large hauler for this work means more pickings for ore thieves who would be more likely to use similar haulers to get bigger payloads. It is unlikely for this reason that macrominers would use these since one ore thief can take a considerable amount of profit from them in one fell swoop, rather than the current 15 minutes worth of ore. If they are set to lose 3 or 4 hours worth of work in one attack, it would not pay them to use the bigger hauler.
--
|
|
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 01:35:00 -
[251]
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319328&page=2
Aw, people seem to be a mite touchy and defensive. Allways happens for indensible ideas...
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319328&page=2#49
James Duar, yes, and you know what that means? Yep, the NPC's run the economy, not the players.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319328&page=2#52
Momfer Undersand, ? The concern isn't ABOUT macro'ers (although, yes, it would be a gift to them as well, thanks for pointing out another reason they're unviable), it's about what it would do to the trade market in player goods. As for the market export, take it to another thread, but bluntly that view is neo-luddite. (Amusing in a space game, yes).
Mihail d'Amour, and WHY are they not larger? Yes, because of the very real issues of making them larger in the first place. It's quite clear from how they're designed...it would of been trivial for CCP to make them larger if they wished...and they did not. Think about it.
Drizit, allways happens. You'll have desireable and undesireable areas. The right soloution is not to introduce something which will have extremely wide ranging and very likely negative impact, but to consider what else could be done. In this case, the answer is quite plain - as well as POS refinaries, introduce (and this is a current idea in threads in this very forum) mining capital ships with onboard refining ability.
See, a relatively simple and elegent system which will NOT mess the market up.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
SolarKnight
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 02:18:00 -
[252]
Hold on, If it is exactly the same as the current freighter, just smaller, then why is it going to kill the market, same effect could be achieved by the larger one, as it has the same space inside plus more.
the only problem i see with freighters, and probably the only reason they havent crashed the market is due to their speed, but then if the smaller one had the same issue then i fail to see why it would wreck the market.
If its only the ability to pick up jet cans thats the issue then don't do it.
The Light in the Darkness
Origin Systems is Recruiting
http://Origin.zapto.org |
Gorath Vaan
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 06:55:00 -
[253]
From the length of this thread it would seem that such a ship is needed. Freighters are the Oil Supertankers of Eve (in the RL sense of the word tank). Indys and Transports are the Petrol Tankers, the road haulers. What does not exist is a satisfactory medium between these two disparate modes of freight mover; a ship that gets the oil to the shore, or the ore to the store, in quantities that take account for the increased abilities and yields of those ACE new mining ships. They said they were going to give miners something months and months ago and they did... but what came with it was a real pia when it came to hauling.
Suffice it to say that if CCP choose to fill this gap with a new ship class, they will decide the practicalities of hauling with it.
The point is ultimately that 9 pages of discusion do not arise without there being a need for this size/style of ship, whatever it's attributes and abilities. If this forum is actually what it says it is then this matter will be the proof of CCP's player input promise.
My preferred ship type is on this thread
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=319328
but as requested by the Mod plz reply here.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.19 19:58:00 -
[254]
SolarKnight, that, cost and agility. By the time you've dealt with all the factors...you might as well have a freighter ANYWAY.
Gorath Vaan, no, it just means that people can type lots. There IS a hole here. And one which won't be filled because it's game-breaking. That people keep on posting about it just indicates that, yes, there IS a hole.
Carriers work, if somewhat...interestingly, but people here are trying to avoid the whole logistics issue, so of course that is not an option for them.
And gameplay > realism.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Drizit
|
Posted - 2006.04.19 20:24:00 -
[255]
The fact that this thread is being referred to on a daily basis from other requests for this type of ship in the suggestions forum denotes that it is a very popular subject.
On the one hand you have those who seem to think a mid sized freighter would wreck the economy. Since the massive freighters have not already done that is testimony to the fact that market trading is already on the decline as a players choice of profession.
On the other hand a massive increase in ship purchases have pushed up the prices of ships and demand for them is slowly exceeding the builders ability to keep up. I have built two BS's and sold them both within a day of putting them on the market and am looking at several days of mining to get enough minerals to make more. Most of this time mining is spent moving it to the station rather than actually mining for it. I have two retrievers mining and one hauler cannot keep up even with expanders which only serve to make it slower.
A 100K m3 hauler with a 100m/s top speed would shave about 15% off the time so it's no big deal but if left as it stands, ships will be in short supply and prices for them will skyrocket.
The big question here is: How much do you want to pay for a replacement ship if you lose yours? How much do you want to put toward the insurance payout to replace it? Because pretty soon, the insurance will nowhere near cover the cost.
No highslot. 2 mids for small shield boost and a cap recharge mod but not enough pg to mount AB's or MWD no lows at all to prevent overdrives or expanders being used. Same cap as a retriever. No big deal, it's not a supercharged turbo tanker, it's just a slow moving hauler with a bit of tank against NPC rats. Needs escort in lowsec and 0.0 since the tank won't hold 2 seconds against PVP players. Shield and armour of a transporter.
--
|
Silentblue1987
|
Posted - 2006.04.19 21:51:00 -
[256]
/signed
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.19 22:12:00 -
[257]
No, freighters have not entirely done that because they are so slow. The common component of almost single one of these ideas is "freighters are too slow".
And blah, blah mining...great, but the other problems are why it won't fly. Not that. If you're refering to rising market prices, that's because of the tradeskills, nothing else.
And let's see..
Slots? Why, it's supposed to be a smaller freighter, and freighter's don't have slots. So it's allready deviating from your supposed aim. If it isn't tough, why does it need mids? (I know, and that's broken...)
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Rogen DarHeel
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 17:30:00 -
[258]
they NEED to be able to scoop to cargo. Otherwise doing things at a POS will the same pain in the ass that it is now. Besides a cargo vessel that could serve on mining ops wouldn't change the mining rate. In fact it would probably be comparable to what an itty V could do on a 4 BS mining op circa 12/2003. With all the new mining vessles added I think a 50km3 cargo ship would be just fine. As it is, the mighty itty V is pitiful when trying to keep up with 4 exuhmers. If new better mining vessles are added I think new better haulers should be right behind them.
|
Ascelot
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 17:38:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Rogen DarHeel
they NEED to be able to scoop to cargo.
Unfort, this would only benefit macro/afk miners, id want a small freighter to haul the serveral mill of trit from station to station.
|
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 17:40:00 -
[260]
Edited by: SentryRaven on 21/04/2006 17:44:35
Edited by: SentryRaven on 21/04/2006 17:42:10
Originally by: Ascelot
Originally by: Rogen DarHeel
they NEED to be able to scoop to cargo.
Unfort, this would only benefit macro/afk miners, id want a small freighter to haul the serveral mill of trit from station to station.
And that was my intention when creating that thread...
- NO SCOOPING OF CANS
This is not a ore transport ship from belt to station... no no no :)
- NO SLOTS (freighter derivate)
What does a freigther need slots for anyway?
- POS ACCESS (negotiable, though very useful and not useful to Macroers or AFKers..)
Only access to hangars, ship maint arrays, assemblies... POS :P
- STATION ACCESS
Same as Freighter...
-SR ( I still would buy one :P)
Include Small Freighters into EVE |
|
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 18:57:00 -
[261]
Originally by: SentryRaven
- POS ACCESS (negotiable, though very useful and not useful to Macroers or AFKers..)
Only access to hangars, ship maint arrays, assemblies... POS :P
Yes, I bet you would. That's one of the major abuse factors. Sorry, I don't agree on greatly simiplifying your POS logistics further.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Taal Mk'tah
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:02:00 -
[262]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: SentryRaven
- POS ACCESS (negotiable, though very useful and not useful to Macroers or AFKers..)
Only access to hangars, ship maint arrays, assemblies... POS :P
Yes, I bet you would. That's one of the major abuse factors. Sorry, I don't agree on greatly simiplifying your POS logistics further.
You don't agree to anything do you!? 
|
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:05:00 -
[263]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Yes, I bet you would. That's one of the major abuse factors. Sorry, I don't agree on greatly simiplifying your POS logistics further.
You don't have to agree, others do :P
New Ship Idea: Small Freighters (100k m¦) in EVE |
Rogen DarHeel
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:07:00 -
[264]
welp "these ships" dont exist yet so yes.. they should be able to scoop to cargo. We already have the freither that can't so the cargo vessel should be able to. To all of a sudden have a cargo ship that doesnt behave like the cargo ships we are all use to using is just plan stupid. Not to mention that it makes the ship incredibly useless to the players that use that ship type the most.
|
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:12:00 -
[265]
Originally by: Rogen DarHeel
welp "these ships" dont exist yet so yes.. they should be able to scoop to cargo. We already have the freither that can't so the cargo vessel should be able to. To all of a sudden have a cargo ship that doesnt behave like the cargo ships we are all use to using is just plan stupid. Not to mention that it makes the ship incredibly useless to the players that use that ship type the most.
That's your personal opinion, but my original threads wants a Transport Ships that has more space than the Industrial but has (almost) the same restrictions as the freighter. And we dont have real cargo ships except the freighter ingame, cause industrials are multi-purpose ships and not cargo ships in my opinion...
New Ship Idea: Small Freighters (100k m¦) in EVE |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:17:00 -
[266]
SentryRaven, never said anyone has to agree, just pointing out that it's a major potential abuse factor.
Anything with the advantages of a freighter (cargo hold larger than T2 industrials) needs all the same penalties or it's abuseable as heck.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 19:22:00 -
[267]
I'd like to hear your explanation why it would be abusable....
New Ship Idea: Small Freighters (100k m¦) in EVE |
Rogen DarHeel
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 20:10:00 -
[268]
thanks for stating the obvious, Forums are meant for expressing personal opinions. ... in any event. A cargo ship bigger then an itty 5 (with or without mods) that can scoop to cargo is my vote.
|
Drizit
|
Posted - 2006.04.21 21:34:00 -
[269]
Agreed. If it can't scoop, there is absolutely no use for it since we already have a freighter class. This idea was originally for an upgrade of the industrial ship which is not in the same class a freighter. Freighters are trade ships not industrial class ships, they are purely for hauling commodities from one station to another. It's like comparing a tipper lorry to a container lorry.
Personally, I wouldn't care if a bigger indy cost the same as a freighter and required similar level of skills but if it doesn't have the capability to scoop to cargo, you will still have people here asking for it.
When I first heard about the freighter, I thought it was overkill but started t oput the isk together to buy one. When I found out they can't scoop, it was immediately struck off my list of things to buy. It has absolutely no use to the mining sector who needs it most.
--
|
SentryRaven
|
Posted - 2006.04.22 00:44:00 -
[270]
Originally by: SentryRaven
I have had some thoughts on the huge difference between the best freighter (imo the Iteron Mark V) with about 17.000+ m¦ (I know... it depends on your cargo expanders..) and the actual freighter with 750.000m¦ of space.
I think the game would not suffer from another ship class being added to the game ("CARGO SHIP" ??) with about 100.000 m¦ or at lest 50.000m¦ of space. Limit it to the same abilities the normal freighter has, I wouldn't care... But to me as a large scale hauler and trader... The Iteron is too small and the freighter is too big and to expensive....
A nice cargo ship for the little man hauler and trader would be very nice... even if it cost 150M or 250M...
Anyone agree with me?
Edited Topic to be more eye appealing -Kaemonn
This is the original post I made, without any edits... I didn't write I wanted a bigger Industrial with scoopability but a smaller freighter with the same limitations.... didn't I?
New Ship Idea: Small Freighters (100k m¦) in EVE |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |