sorry, but that is nothing more than a massive nerf.

Seriously? You are nerfing freighters? I... I can't believe it!

Hull rigs (if released) and implants. It's a no-brainer, really. Has always been.

Were they too OP in the current form?

I warned you bears this would happen if rigs became a thing on freighters.

Seriously, what's the point here?

Can't this be a "power creep" buff all across the board and just ADD rigs. Why does it have to be #$@#@ $ painful.

Those cheers you heard at FanFest? Silenced, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in utter fricken disbelief. I fear something terrible has happened.

So, what's the point of all this?

no, to do that you would leave everything as it is and then the rigs let you make it better than it currently is.

Told rigs. Unless you were told more than that. Which they were not when "rigs coming to freighters" was proudly proclaimed on stage to wild applause. Or did I miss an announcement someplace?

No need for you and that other genius Dave Stark to be douches about it.

Yes you can. Just take the numbers Fozzie is throwing out and decrease the nerf a tad. Make it less painful. Do I need to start pulling numbers here>?

They should stand out and say "we don't like everything built in Sobaseki, sold in Jita and moved to everywhere else. We want you to build stuff locally.

Nice to see another utterly ******** update by ccp.

I am pretty certain this is exactly not what the player base wanted.

Which doesn't make the ship any better at all.

When can we expect a devblog on these massive changes to freighters and jumpfreighters

I would like some more explanation of these changes

So, I'm seriously asking: what is the freighter pilot getting out of all this for all the extra risk they are expected to assume?

To me it seems like a really big burger full of fecal matter.

Which is the problem in the first place.

They wanted it all, without having to think about it.

You spelt "and" wrong. Unless you have found a magical teleportation technique that can move isotopes from regions on the other side of the map to the region where they are needed.

Nobody expected such changes

The costs for that change could have been mitigated by just reclassifying freighters as 'large' instead of capital since they walk like a large, talk like a large and act like a large (in that they can go into highsec) anyways.

I expected nerf. I didn't expect such nerf. agility+tank+fuel cost+cargo don't you think that's too much for JF?

Dude can u please post one more time saying "but you asked for this"

It's welfare for ice miners

Freighters were fine.

Nobody likes nerfs, but they do happen and we adapt. But changes really should happen because of a vision, not just because a few people want something for nothing.

Ahh so I was also correct and did in fact say this would happen. I shall now join the 'Told you so' group.

Always, always be careful what you wish for.

I think the 'I told you so' guys should start a new thread and start backpadding around in there, because its getting pretty annoying in this one.

give those big whales at least some kind of protection.

Also sticking it to retards who did ask for this is not a good reason to support this change because it's going to hurt a lot of people who didn't (and who don't even fly these ships at all).

Is that a subtle backhand to CCP? "If you're gonna **** up freighters, you may as well do it to pods/shuttles rabble rabble"

I hate ganking, but If this idiocy will hit TQ I will start bumping day and night every freighter that will pass Uedama and Niarja until people will stop hauling and all industry will go to hell.

When Orca gets its balance pass it should be adjusted to use capital rigs as well to keep things consistent.

i Now know why you didnt make this anouncement at fanfest some1 would nhave decked you at the pubcrawl

after star citizen comes out.

I dunno about decking, but I would've yelled something really obscene and insulting in a very loud voice.

I see we've reached physically threatening CCP employees. This thread is coming along nicely.

I still say the nerfs had nothing to do with the addition of rigs and the 'told you so' crowd is missing this point intentionally just to harvest more tears. Firs came the nerfs and to sell them as (semi-)boosts rigs were thrown in. Under this point of view the changes suddenly become logical.

Ty for this Changes

https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx
https://secure.eveonline.com/CancelSubscription.aspx

makes it so much easyer to klick this link

Knew I was right

You are not getting a net buff out of this.

are cargohold rigs stacking penalized?

In fact what is wrong in making the JF's and freighters have a low module each and so we can use a DCU II, the rigs are just a big annoyance and add a huge cost to what are already expensive ships. The changes to cargo capacity while hurting me make hisec industry more viable against null sec when the refining changes hit so why not.

I want gank pilots to have to scan my Charon to see what defenses (or lack thereof) I have on my ship.

They could always just make freighters immune to scanning

That would cause a ruckus, but would be more in line with the risk/reward

Freighter ganking has zero risk, except maybe the loot fairy, and all the rewards

All 3 of those definitions rely on an unkown outcome

There is no nerf, if rigs AND MODS are added to freighters it just makes them like all the other ships in the game (i.e. meaningful choice at a cost).

Let me ask you this, what if every ship in the game had no rigs and no mods, you got hull bonuses and that was it?

Would you even be playing this game?

What you want would result is an enormous nerf to freighters.

What we need is a thread that proves this to be the case. One may turn up at some point soon.

Indeed that would be for the best.

Who knows, we may get lucky?

Not killing a target with near-zero ehp variety and zero tanking variety? Are you worse at eve than my dog?

Chances are, Digger had a straight face when posting that.

If you convert those "risks" to numbers, I have to say you can't really call a number real if it only has imaginary part.
Piracy is fine. Sitting on a gate lazily picking tastiest victim among those who have no choice but to be there is not piracy.

The only non-imaginary risk you have in ganking a freighter is being worse than my dog at eve.

Especially since, by definition, the gankers themselves are unable to protect their looting ship since they are all in station waiting out criminal timers.

u say that as if avoiding ganks requires u to be better at playing the game than a dog.

I wonder if the best use is gonna be armor rigs + armor boost + slave set now.

Well if your dog is better than you, the ship might never undock because dogs have trouble with using mouse. If he manage to click the button, now you are **** out of luck and will die as you drift slowly away from the station because a dog definitely won't need less than a full day to select anything and then warp to is.

Statistics is an exact scientific branch of mathematics.

Again, if 'no votes nerf boats,' why is it I vote, and all my favorite boats keep getting nerfed anyway?

More like "people were asking for obviously needed buffs and stupid people nerfed it instead".

Uh no, when you do a significance test at the 90% level you're saying that you want to be 90% certain that your confidence interval contains the true population proportion, or that you want to be 90% certain that rejecting the null hypothesis is correct.

It's about probabilities, not interpretation.

See, while people say it does, I wonder if that that's not just an urban legend like the "recycling alts" that people always talk about.

which can still be collected in various ways and give different out comes.

I swear this thread has just become the same 5 people trolling each other.

Actually I was talking about you.

Minerals are getting less abundant.

stuff.

It is obvious to any reasonable person that does not have an ulterior motive.

There is no nerf under the plan I proposed no matter how many times I have to restate that fact it isn't going to change. You can adjust the hulls and then make rigs - mods to either put it back exactly like it is now or choose to rig + mod differently if you so choose just like all the other ships in the game.

Now its my turn to ask you to respond to my question because it is relevant to the seriously restricted options currently available to freighter pilots.

so ccp you say you listen to your player base and their opinion matters

so you have heard what the players think what are you going to do about it

i say fire Fozzie and get in a dev who doesnt cause players to cancel subs

keep it up and I promise eve online is going to choke on its own blood.. and fozzie will be long gone before that you wake up about it.

So tell me, is there any specefic reason you mention the 'told you so' thing in about every post you make here, other then trolling or boasting?

people like me haven't been playing the game for 10 yrs check that crap dude.

Telling random people who complain about these changes 'i told you so', indifferent if they have anything to or not to do with asking for these changes, every other post you make, isnt constructive, and is far from feedback. So again, poaching or trolling?

People like you remind me why i stopped reading eveo forums years ago.

I have a plan.

The reason people read this thread is because they are interested in what ccp has in store for jumpfreighters and freighters. I happen to make money from building freighters and jumpfreighters, so, beside all the hauling i do myself, these changes are going to impact me possibly more then the average logi guy.

Now, reading trough this lot with all the whining about these (really harsh) changes and sift out the good ideas/devposts is one thing, but what really pisses me off is this bunch of kids who have been trying to **** up the thread from page one with these 'told you so' comments. Really, if all you want is some backpadding because you predicted something, got trolled about it, are butthurt, and now want some revenge or something, please, go start a own thread in some offtopic section where you can go troll amonghts your 'told you so' fanclub. Adding no feedback at all is still better then whatever you are trying to do.

And as far as my feedback goes (who the f cares anyway), i gave that already somewhere of the start of this thread. I think they both could use tweaks, yes. I think they should have some level of modification, yes. But not by nerfing the ships in all their major aspects and then giving you an option (lol, nessecity) to unfuck one of those stats at a 1.5b price tag (wich is a false level of modification anyways as you cannot unfit rigs). The idea Mynna came up with is like a thousand times better thought trough then what ccp came up with.

Time to learn a rig skill to 5 -> 13 -16 days depending upon attributes and if jury rigging has been trained.

The penalty is significant for capital ships, which in this case is freighters getting it to 5 is nice but if he doesn't have other thing to train.

I hide all posts from tippia, Kaarous, Dave Start and likes of those, and voila, thread is nice again! Recommend everyone doing that.

They have zero usefulness in community and should be removed from it.

What power creep?

BUT why stop at rigs, why not allow fitting of some modules?

Unlike with rigs, which you have to sadly fit in, forever, for huge amount of ISK.

One low creates its own (pretty significant) headache: we still have that annoying DCII that needs to be taken into account GÇö 2.5+ù the hul EHP of anything you fit it to. As long as it does what it does, hull generally has to come down in order to not be completely silly. At the same time, people will want to fit cargo expanders, but since the base hull is down from having to anticipate the DCII, you start out at almost half the current EHP, and then it gets another chunk cut out by a single expanderGǪ and suddenly you have a cargo-fitted freighter that is weaker than most mining barges.

With only one slot, the DCII kind of becomes the only viable module so you might as well just fold it into the ship and not have the lowslot at all, at which point we're right back where we started.

Because an orca has 500k m3???

Of which you can only use 40k to transport things that are not assembled ships or ore. Yeah, that is certainly a good ship to transport Courier Contracts or quantities of modules, minerals, etc.

I really really dislike people that don't understand what terms mean before they use them.

At best freighter ganks are a sink as they remove things from the game.

A faucet is something that creates something from thin air. aka NPC bounties.
A sink is something that removes something from the economy, aka taxes and sov fees.

and they ARE an isk faucet because of insurance.

So you arent adding anything relevant to this conversation.

Well we have me proposing alternative solutions to get things to a better state than we have now, and we have you who is only filling this thread with I told you so posts... Looks to me like the whining is falling more on your side than mine.

They absolutely don't. JF fill a completely different role. They are rather miss-used as smaller gate-to-gate freighters and from a price point are in an absolutely different league.

Right. I never said anything about orcas in any of my posts.

Because an orca has 500k m3???

Now you're fed up with that too?

Context. You offered an incorrect rebuttal to an idea post that I offered as an alternative to these changes. You were the one that brought up Orcas not me. Without your foolish post offering up the orca as a suitable alternative to my thoughts, these two pages of me stating what orca's actually do and don't do wouldn't exist.

Read the original post I made. There was no mention of Orca's or DST's or any other hauling ship.

I will say that you might have had a point way back when carrier hauling was a thing and JF's didn't exist. But that day has long come and gone.

So, basically, this change is going to happen in one way or another. To present a player backd solution to the change we dont like, do we throw our weight behind Mynnna's numbers or what? Cause we need to come up with a coherent counter proposal and move on from all this other fluff.

Like I said, this will happen, we need to band together and make it happen in a better way.

but that's not going to happen

This might make things clearer: (since forgetting words is bad)

I didn't mention the orca in any of my "original" posts. I wasn't whining about what the orca could or could not do. I didn't bring up the orca. You did.

You proved I was wrong about what exactly?

I will when you do.

Here are my posts in this thread from the last few days

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

If by didn't edit you mean took out the part where people brought up orcas to make it look like I was talking about something out of the blue... then sure.

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........

What it didn't do was show anything else.

I did read it.

Your argument was that I was whining about what an orca could and could not do.
My response was that you were wrong and I never mentioned the orca. My point still stands. I never did mention the orca. Someone else brought it up and I corrected them.

And I didn't mention orcas.

You can say this all you want, but it doesn't make it anymore true.

I didn't mention them.

No I didn't.

I can see some of these reductions are needed to compensate for the boost from rigs. But even with rigs, a freighter cannot be brought up to the same performance level it has right now. If you rig for cargo, the tank is less. If you rig for tank, the cargo is less. If you rig a bit for both, both are less. There is no combination of rigs that return a freighter to where it is right now.

Please reconsider the degree of the reductions to cargo and tank.

Why shouldn't we be able to get to the same point we are now?

I love the idea of lowslot fitting on freighters, but I firmly believe the DCU is too potent to balance a ship with such insane amounts of structure. Remove the ability to fit a DCU on a freighter if you give it a low slot.

They could still hull tank with bulkheads,

being wrong still

To be fair, I'm excluding a lot more than that. The idea of having a ship that can only fit fitting-free modules intrigues me. The main problem, as noted above, is that some modules would have to be made free to fit to make that part of the equation work.

You are aware that bulkheads will reduce cargo, right?

Cargo capacity is the raison d'+¬tre for freighters / jump freighters.

CCP Fozzie wrote:

We are also going to swap the speed penalty on all reinforced bulkhead modules to an equal percentage cargo capacity penalty. The agility penalty will remain intact at this time.

I'm sorry, but it is insane to balance agility, speed, capacity, and tank around such a powerful module.

Harder than you might think.

Eve has no understanding of 'only these modules' or 'but not that class of ship'

I would be very interested in hearing how you propose to make hauling "more fun".

Do elaborate on that.

Since it has to do with cargo, I suggest a Tetris ripoff game.

Good evening everyone. Just wanted to let you guys know that we haven't forgotten about you. I'm discussing a few improvements to the design with the CSM now, and we'll be able to start getting your feedback on them soon.

Have a good night!

You assume they disapprove of it.

As for Fozzie. Please stop hanging around Grayscale, you are acquiring his ability to ruin whatever he touches.

PS. After this disgrace don't even think about touching the Orca or Rorqual, lest you break them too.

Regarding ORCA, the vocal request is to increase the ore bay capacity since they got over shadowed by exhumers buffs, nothing else I read before requesting something different.

How about we ban you from the game, hm?

Little respect goes along way :)

he wanted feedback he's getting it. tough cookie if his feelings are getting hurt.. I don't care, not like I can expect him to stick around for the next 10 yrs working on eve.. fact is I honestly think he's screwing up the game even more before he departs. it has been done plenty of times before by dev's.

he reminds me of a sith right now. I don't trust him.. period.. now that's my opinion and I don't care if it makes you burst a blood vessel.

In exchange for what?

I would presume for ability to fit full rack of T2 rigs for getting that 40% back. And ofc a minor agility reduction as a "tradeoff"

The same warm feeling a JF pilot is getting from fitting these nice T2 rigs for getting back where it was. Like the fuel consumption increase would not have been enough to poke the smaller entities in the eye.

That was the answer. The "warm feeling". The same thing the JF pilots are getting :)

he doesnt get it. hes just blinded by nerd rage.

He's talking about Carniflex.

i dint take a risk n dont even try to troll me stark i trained for somthing that was presented to me in the market least ccp can do is refund the skillpoints or giv me another month of gametime to cover the needless training for this freighter crap
this beein said shove ur told ur so's where the sun dont shine

Question, will everything in eve cost significantly more because of this?

with 3 T1 trimarks I can only get an obelisk slightly higher on EHP than before. The only reason I find this to be an issue is that it seems in many other areas of rebalance, ships have been balanced to account for some of the power creep in recent years, while one ship most susceptible (a freighter with no offensive capabilities) is seeing too much of a reduction.

I dont see why this change was implemented in the first place. There arent many ways to fit a jf or freighter anyway. So there shouldn't have been a big surprise to how people fit them.

The goal of freighters is to move the maximum amount of cargo from point A to point B in the least amount of time with the most efficiency, without getting ganked.

Cargo or agility rigs on a freighter? Blasphemy. Agility mods? What madness! Low-grade NOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMaaaaaaaaaaaaadddds? Sacrilege!

Are the BPOs in? It would be a round-about way, but stillGǪ

As for fuel rigs:
That like saying "This rig reduces the capacitor need need of entering warp, but decreases warp speed".

maths can be pretty hard

Yes. Although I'm warming up to the lowslot ideaGǪ

Don't fear the lowslots Dave. They too will come at a cost and we'll get another hundred pages of tears from people who can't do the math. Probably a pretty severe nerf to base stats. But the level of real flexibility should vastly outweigh changes to the base stats. Far more so than all this BS related to a discussion about rigs alone.

At some point these ships have to come into the same realm as all other ships in the game. Either leave them alone (change is bad) or rebalance them from the ground up.

u could remove racial freighters and make one ORE freighter. wouldnt change much.
same with all haulers.

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!

Dave: They really should lock this thread on your last comment. lol

Given that the CSM is largely 0.0 sock puppets we can probably conclude from this that version two has no change whatsoever to diminish Jfreighter performance.

21-25% increased cargo space is power creep, especially in combination with the option to change travel speed when carrying less cargo.

if your going to give them low slots, then revert your HP changes and allow them to fit a damage control.



if someone wants to fit a Damage control and 2 bulkheads in the lows, they lose alot of space but they gain alot of survivability. This seems like a fair trade off to me.

so instead of a kick in the balls, we're supposed to be happy with a punch to face?

Worried about your jump freighter? Send it along with a battlecruiser providing armor or shield resist boosts.

I don't even fill my Orca...

I'd like to know where you got the intel that said I do...

which jf gets shot at after jumping?

why is the fenrir so much faster and mobile than the other 3? especially since gallente are meant to be the most agile

If I get a higher tank, then I'll have a need for one!

That indeed is a good question.

The answer to this question is "not in Kronos, but possibly at a later date".

Either way that's a discussion for another thread since these ships cannot fit Damage Controls.

I'd like them to be passive, if only for the fact that 30 seconds is a long time to wait for one to cycle when I want to pull it off my ship to refit something else.

The question is, why would you want to do either?

Really? You cite that JF only had one meaningful rig to use (cargohold) and so you give low slots, well they still really only have one meaningful module,

Erm...

Since when to Bulkheads reduce cargo space? I thought that was just istabs. Bulkheads appear to only have 3 effect: increased hull HP, reduced top speed, (slight) increase to inertia.

Are they changing that? Or did you accidentally include the istab cargo reduction in your numbers?

Stop asking for DCU. It's a terrible idea. There is a reason they have restrictive fittings. DCU has no drawbacks other than not having a 3rd slot for cargo.

all you who were saying if freighters were given rigs then everyone would be sorry because it would be a nerf.

Not sure if you noticed; but they didn't get a nerf at first. Rigs were a straight buff, with only sub-warp speed drawbacks, then you and all you the other fail easymode gankers whined, Fozzie made the mistake of listening to you, this thread ensued because the bear was poked.

Oh cool.

So the baseline stats...higher/lower than before?

That is, are we slotting just to meet live, or are able to exceed live in at least one area?

I'll have to do some comparisons...

Anyway, thanks. Good to know.

Fozzie puts out moronic changes that the entire Eve universe hates, except the griefers.

And a big "screw you" to the people who spent isk hoarding capital cargo rigs.

Fozzie's initial post clearly stated Freighters would use capital sized rigs.

You are frightened of the maths involved and the permentations in allowing a Damage Control to be fitted aren't you?

Ytterbium hinted at DC possibly becoming passive.