|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
51
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 17:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
Why all the Rhea hate?
Most other JF lose about 75,000m3 to 78,000m3 base cargo Rhea loses 87,000m3 base
Rhea use the most fuel by far or is fuel being normalized? like carriers, dreads etc?? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
52
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
They jumped to that price about 10 seconds after Fozzie announced it on the stream. I was in Jita watching them. I am a poor so I certainly didn't buy any for 240mil and relist for 750. Not did I buy out almost all the t2 materials. I swear. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Abulurd Boniface wrote:
I was enthusiastic when CCP Fozzie announced rigs for freighters at Fanfest. The way these are going to be implemented, if that really is the final word, makes it seem like there's no real gain for the freighter pilot.
because u thought u were getting a straight buff to a ship that didnt need a buff. No real gain other than choice was due.
Not necessarily. But I didn't expect a huge overall nerf.
That being said I am overall OK with the changes as long as they either fix the Rhea cargo or normalize fuel usage. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote: u can exceed a current freighters capacity. u can exceed a current freighters tank. u can exceed a current freighters speed.
but u cant have all three at once. u have to choose.
Which is the problem in the first place. They wanted it all, without having to think about it.
Or You can have cargo rigs nerf structure. Agi rigs nerf structure Hull rigs nerf cargo |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 03:20:00 -
[5] - Quote
OK, I am trying to be nice, thoughtful and concise
I even made a spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TYU__8DwIT0Qa7NphPZnDCOhGpzIKJ2aEd-k3EOUHu0/edit?usp=sharing
The biggest qualm I have with all of this is the efficiency of a JF
If you look at the isotope per M3 for each JF, they all got a boost, except the Rhea, it numbers are almost stagnant. Personally, I would like to see fuel burn normalized, but not nerfing the cargo nearly as much would also be an outcome I would scream about.
I also added in the additional fuel burn and it get even more skewed
I'm not saying not to do the change, just wondering why the Rhea took such a large (87,000m3) hit when the rest took a much smaller (75,000 - 78,000m3) hit |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 16:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Tippia wrote:Lair Osen wrote:I think he means that the Rigs have inbuilt drawbacks already so why is an extra massive nerf needed? It sounds like he wants more. And still, that's an even simpler answer: because they have to keep the freighters balanced even after the bonuses that rigs will provide. are cargohold rigs stacking penalized?
No, neither are low slot cargo expanders |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 17:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I want gank pilots to have to scan my Charon to see what defenses (or lack thereof) I have on my ship.
so you're willing to take a massive freighter nerf, just so gankers have to click 1 more button before they gank you?
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 |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 17:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I want gank pilots to have to scan my Charon to see what defenses (or lack thereof) I have on my ship.
so you're willing to take a massive freighter nerf, just so gankers have to click 1 more button before they gank you? 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 First of all, it's not zero. Concord will destroy your ship 100% of the time, so the risk is 100%. Steps taken to mitigate the effects of that risk is called smart gameplay. Secondly, ganking is only as easy, and as profitable, as bad players make it for us. Thirdly, I have seen 8 billion isk killmails that drop less than 300mil. It does happen, and since the possibility of that happening is NOT zero, that means that risk is in fact involved in any gank, regardless of how much the freighter is hauling.
Concord is NOT a risk, it is a known outcome - a calculated outcome based on scanning the ship - NOT a risk, it is 100% a known quantity
second - has nothing to do with risk reward for ganking, that is risk/reward for hauling
third - I gave the loot fairy as a prime example - and the only real risk
So, if you couldn't scan would you stop ganking? probably not - therefore the risk is still worth the reward if if you can't scan |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 17:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
1risk noun \-êrisk\ : the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen
: someone or something that may cause something bad or unpleasant to happen
: a person or thing that someone judges to be a good or bad choice for insurance, a loan, etc.
All 3 of those definitions rely on an unkown outcome
Possibilty, may and judges
Will, shall and certainly are in a different category altogether |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Digger Pollard] Quote:This is hilarious argument. Unless you're worse than my dog at eve, your freighter won't get the crimewatch flag It rather has to, you know, since there aren't that many ships that can pick up and handle freighter-sized loads of loot. So with those answers in mind, I feel pretty confident of my previous GÇ£0 risk = 0 insightGÇ¥ model for ganking risk assessments.
If you don't know how to launder your loot with the fleet hangar in an Orca, you really shouldn't be ganking. the freighters picking up the loot are as safe as a baby in its mother womb |
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Digger Pollard wrote:Stuff.
You cant just brush them all away. The risks are there and very real, the only people who think ganking is risk free are people who don't do it, have never done it, and have a personal gripe with piracy even being an option. The same people who think buying sec back with those tags is a good idea.
yeah, tags...LOL
They are more a one time thing, not to be used on a regular basis |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 23:25:00 -
[12] - Quote
Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Maybe the riggable freighters need to be a new set of ships in addition to the ones we have now.... A new t2 variant maybe?
This would allow people to continue using their ship exactly the way they've been using them, or train up for the riggable one with more choices as to how to fit/fly it and would also justify less of a nerf to it's stats overall.
They suck, no one would ever use them |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 14:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
We need to get back on the freighters need scan immunity...that one was going pretty good for 4-5 pages |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 14:22:00 -
[14] - Quote
Sael Va'Tauri wrote:Given the fact that cargo is taking around a 30% nerf, I assume the material components of building freighters is going to drop by 30% as well? Since we purchase freighters to haul things, and we're going to have to buy rigs to bring them back to their pre nerf status, its only logical to reduce the cost of freighters so we keep everything the same, right?
Same for JF?? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 19:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:TheMercenaryKing wrote:Love the new update, but one question, when will damage controls become passive mods? 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. Don't you think you went a little bit overboard in terms of raw EHP? - there's a very large gap between the obelisk and providence compared to the charon and fenrir - where the fenrir will be beyond the tank of a TQ obelisk according to this: http://eve.beyondreality.se/pics/Kronos/FreighterCargoTank.png
Your numbers are wrong- you rounded cargo expanders to 28%, they should only be 27.5% |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 01:04:00 -
[16] - Quote
Don't look at the fully tanked ARK
PS - don't use bulkheads |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 15:05:00 -
[17] - Quote
Dareth Astrar wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone the Op has now been updated with a revised version of the design. As many of you were anticipating, we will be achieving the goal of customizability through low slots instead of rig slots. Big thanks to everyone who has provided reasoned feedback in the thread and special thanks to the CSM. Thank you for listening. Valterra Craven wrote: I like this better but I still don't like the fact that armor can be tanked somewhat (resistance plates) and shields can not. This wouldn't have been a big deal had you leave HP values in hull so every could tank roughly equally, but since you guys moved such a large chunk of HP to shields and armor this seems to be an unfair advantage for armor based races.
I wish i knew how to edit EFT files to create fits based off this to see just what the difference is.
It's a valid point. There are ENAM's for armour tanks, but I don't recall a low slot shield resist module aside from the DCU, which we have been read clearly stated as not going to be a freighter suitable module. That does swing things rather heavily one way on tanking front, which to be fair, does give you a reason other then racial role play to fly those other freighters now. OK, there's a very sizable hit from Cargo Expander's negative to hull points for these ships, but I still think this is a better place then the previous rigs option.
Freighters nor jump freighters will have the CPU to use an EANM either
They can use a ANP, which generally give less overall EHP than bulkheads. However 3 ANP also give great resists on an Ark, which lend itself very well to repping.
So, to prevent ganks, bulkheads are the way to go for strictly overall buffer, but if you want a bait ship, a JF with ANP x3 will be a friggin beast. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 02:14:00 -
[18] - Quote
SiSi also has base for Rhea at 143,000m3 cargo
OP has 144,000m3
Dunno which is correct honestly.... |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 06:38:00 -
[19] - Quote
Loraine Gess wrote:@CCP Fozzie, you're missing a very clever thing. You've addressed the idea that freighters will use CPRs: Quote: (For Jump Freighters) Capacitor Power Relays
However, you forgot to factor in capacitor FLUX COILS. Yes, these provide less recharge. But they do a very interesting thing: They reduce overall capacitor. This means a JF can be "capped up" from a partner, buddy, logi chain etc much more quickly. Because capitals rely on % of total capacitor, NOT a flat cost in Joules to jump. I am not saying this is a negative thing. I would like to see JF capacitor recharge nerfed, actually, providing a niche for this sort of gameplay where players have to work together. And perhaps, be trusted to work together... e: I ran some numbers and JFs will not have the sufficient fitting for an appreciable number of CPRs/flux coils. I think these modules are due for some lowered fitting requirements. They're pretty niche (not because of fitting) and should thus not have any impact on balance, though I'm sure some theorycrafting is in order to ensure that.
Do any of the flux coils even fit?
theship only has a few CPU and I think flux coils are like 8-15 cpu each aren't they?
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
61
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 16:12:00 -
[20] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Herr Wilkus wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Barune Darkor wrote:The gankers are unhappy and the industrialists/freighter pilots are unhappy. Must mean that it's pretty well balanced. Both groups are generally pretty happy, so I don't know what you're looking at. Well, consider this: The carebears are complaining about not getting > 1 Million EHP via (passive) DCII's because they want to be invincible. They're dumb and don't matter. Herr Wilkus wrote:Experienced gankers understand its a problem when 720K EHP JFs move 6-8 Billion in cargo in highsec with negligible risk. I'm pretty sure carrying 6-8 billion ISK in a jump freighter doesn't have negligible risk, even at 720k EHP.
Carrying 100 Bil in a JF is a very small risk as long as you have an exit cyno
|
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
61
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 21:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I was obviously not talking about that use case, but thanks for assuming I don't know how jump drives work.
Obviously for people who use their jump freighters to move stuff between high (Jita in other words) and low/null, the risk is minimal regardless of how little or how much tank your JF has. What about those that use theirs entirely in highsec (e.g. Tippia) to take advantage of its extra agility, warp speed, and tank? Those people don't generally have exit cynos.
But Warr Akini is right, 720k EHP is pretty ridiculous. It's true then, I guess, that they do have way too much tank.
For those that use JF in high sec for extra agi etc
Buy 4 freighters in place of a single JF, tank them all and move twice as much per run and have twice as much gank threshold per freighter
I guess null use and high sec are so vastly different, hard to see the other person POV
You can get Anshar and Ark above 800K (CorelliA-type ANP x3) with full bonuses from a navy implant and a CS running 5 links. Of course if you are going to spend this much effort, just have a cyno in carrou or ignoitton and it is only 3-5 jumps to jita and you have an insta exit cyno if needed.
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
62
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 11:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
Lahingingel wrote:What about JF fuel consumption? Will it be remaining the same as it is (other than 50% increase across the board) and has anyone bothered to run already the numbers for isotopes / m3 after the summer patch?
Assuming ofc, max skills and max expanded (of for comparison it would be interesting also to see with JF skill at 4 for non-dedicated hauling alts).
Yes, I have run the numbers, no it didn't change much cause M3 didn't change much and isotopes used haven't changed much other than the 50% increase. |
|
|
|