Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

rigs already have drawbacks, why should they change them just to make MiniLuv happy?

Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

Because currently the drawback is a CPU penalty -- which is not a drawback on a ship that needs exactly 0 CPU

These rigs will use the Armor Rigging skill, with the same speed decrease penalty as trimarks. They will be available in all sizes.

rigs already have drawbacks, why should they change them just to make MiniLuv happy?

Emphasis is mine.

Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

Wouldn't sub-warp speed decrease be almost completely irrelevant on freighters? Well, aside from when you autopilot.

Especially if they don't reduce freighter base cargo space, there'll be practically no reason to ever fit anything but the hull rigs on a regular freighter. Jump freighters would obviously benefit greatly from the cargo rigs, but the lack of increased hull HP wouldn't hurt them nearly as much either.

Because a max velocity penalty on a Freighter isn't a penalty at all, since nothing they do in space is affected by it. They're still going to align and warp at the same speed with or without tanking rigs.

they're actually going to align very marginally faster with hull rigs :^)

this is why ur teacher tells u to show ur workings. so she can point at the bit where u went wrong.

Wouldn't sub-warp speed decrease be almost completely irrelevant on freighters? Well, aside from when you autopilot.

Especially if they don't reduce freighter base cargo space, there'll be practically no reason to ever fit anything but the hull rigs on a regular freighter. Jump freighters would obviously benefit greatly from the cargo rigs, but the lack of increased hull HP wouldn't hurt them nearly as much either.

max velocity effects align speed champ

unless people web freighters for target practice

Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

To expand on 'this would be the best balance,' consider this little trinket of logic:

A cargo expander rig increases by a percent value the most important aspect of a freighter or jump freighter (or to a lesser extent Orca or Rorqual), directly affecting its bottom line by a significant amount. Its drawback, if made to be armor amount as suggested, will decrease -by a percent value (this is the important part)- an already minute and largely insignificant attribute of a freighter or jump freighter (the vast majority of a freighter's EHP is in its hull). So the drawback does not necessarily match the benefit, being an incredibly insignificant effect on an absolute scale.

A hull rig, decreasing speed, will indeed affect autopiloters, but let's face it, they weren't getting anywhere fast anyway. Active freighter operation, almost a hilarious contradiction in terms, would be largely unaffected. Remember the part about freighter/JF having a LOT of their ehp in hull? This means a hull rig, increasing a percent value of the hull, has a hell of a lot more of an effect on an absolute scale than a piddly max velocity reduction.

With my reputation as Miniluv chief on the line, I plan to get more accounts to gank more freighters anyway, but do consider making the drawbacks appropriately mirrror the benefits, at least in the case of freighters/JFs and to a lesser extent Orcas/Rorquals. As some guy above me said, though, the final balance numbers aren't out yet.

This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way.

Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

Let us know what you think!
-Fozzie

Real men hull tank. Thanks CCP! Now we can do it for REAL!

this.

I checked the numbers in evehq. A hull tanked neutageddon will have more ehp than an armour tanked neutageddon - if you ignore the effect of gang links.

This is because the hull rigs give a 5% larger bonus when compared to trimarks.

Hull rigs on orcas, with DC and Bulkhead. Yeah, not looking forward to trying to pop those.