"Why not modules instead" is a bit of a common question, so on a whim I threw together a concept for just that.

Three lows creates for a lot more options and makes more of a spectrum instead of huge swings. It also makes the downsides and upsides more meaningful. For example with a single low, cargo would have to drop by only about 10%, maybe even as little as 5%, to make there be a reasonably sized upside to fitting the expander instead. But if you're only giving up 5-10% of your cargo, then fitting a DC II or really anything else becomes far too much of a no-brainer - there's just no longer much of a trade-off involved.

Well eighter way, removing more ehp off these already fragile ships, making them more common with lower ehp will result in a rabbits race for kb padding. To me that would more of an isk sink short term, and leaves a no choice in fitting long term.

Ok. No, reducing EHP does not make freighters into ISK sinks, quite the opposite. It doesn't really do anything since you can just compensate for it if that's what you're after.

the optimal solution is for freighters to be left the hell alone, and for people to think before they ask for changes.

No what you did is quoted posts that you edited to make it seem like you had a point. Stop lying.

It never ceases to amaze me how CCP manages to break every promise and botch every positive change time after time after time!

Here is the KEYNOTE about freighters/jfs

http://youtu.be/k07Uu7qUEa0?t=46m39s

I quote fozzie:

Quote:

This means you'll be able to increase your cargohold BEYOND CURRENT STANDARDS with cargo rigs

And then this thread....

seriously, so dumb........ so idiotic...... so disappointing....... so typical........

Interesting. Does that mean they're requiring all of their pilots to spend 80M ISK on a Cargohold Optimization Rig to reach that volume?

I'd have guessed that they'd have dropped it to 500K m3 to accommodate all of the various rigging options.

Ladies and gentlemen this is your nightly message to let you know that I've caught up to this point in the thread and that we still have not forgotten about you.

There's a version two of the design currently posted for the CSM in their internal forums, they've responded largely positively so far. I'm going to let them think about it overnight and if all looks good we'll post the proposal for public feedback tomorrow.

Thanks as always!

Has anyone run the numbers on the total value a fully tanked a anshar can hold now?

Site looks very handy but I don't know if I trust the numbers. Right now it's saying that a freighter can only carry about a quarter million in goods before it starts becoming profitable to gank. Goes contrary to the idea of a billion being the max collateral that seems fairly standard to hauling corps.

I like the new changes. It doesn't cost me billions to get similar to what I have now, and actually gives me a fair amount of choice in setting it up and tuning it to my style, and I can cheaply and quickly change it if I want to.

+1 for new proposal.

The only concern that seems to exist is shield ships not having an option like adaptive nano plating. Perhaps a low slot option only available to freighter and JF's that is exactly the same but affects shields?

This would require only one new mod in the game.