| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Nightingale Actault
Divided Unity
The Night Crew Alliance
25
   |
Posted - 2014.05.17 17:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Excellent changes.
Freighter pilots now have to choose between tank, time into warp, or warp speed. If you were filling your cargo full before you were likely doing it wrong anyways creating a giant gank target, and by going max cargo after the changes you are doing the same. Choosing to cut short time from your align or massive combined time from your warp speed is another choice that freighter pilots will need to ask themselves. With the changes to warp speed affecting freighters the way they have, I definitely like the option of choosing a safe amount of materials to transport at a faster warp speed for less total transport time. |
Nightingale Actault
Divided Unity
The Night Crew Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 18:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Nightingale Actault wrote:Excellent changes.
Freighter pilots now have to choose between tank, time into warp, or warp speed. If you were filling your cargo full before you were likely doing it wrong anyways creating a giant gank target, and by going max cargo after the changes you are doing the same. Choosing to cut short time from your align or massive combined time from your warp speed is another choice that freighter pilots will need to ask themselves. With the changes to warp speed affecting freighters the way they have, I definitely like the option of choosing a safe amount of materials to transport at a faster warp speed for less total transport time. Filling your freighter with Tritanium worth 400M makes you a big gank target? Please give me something from your mushrooms. 
Choosing one of the cheapest materials you would be transporting is a great way to counter my point, however I don't believe that a majority of the items being transported are going to be along these same lines.
Additionally, and off that topic, I believe these changes are also a great way to increase the viability of localized nullsec manufacturing. If less items are being JF into nullsec it will give greater opportunity for those items to be created locally at profitable levels. |
Nightingale Actault
Divided Unity
The Night Crew Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 18:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote:Nightingale Actault wrote:
Additionally, and off that topic, I believe these changes are also a great way to increase the viability of localized nullsec manufacturing. If less items are being JF into nullsec it will give greater opportunity for those items to be created locally at profitable levels.
I did a short look through my "shipping manifests" in recent times. About 10% of my cargo could have been produced in 0.0. Mostly ships and some ammo. So...how exactly is this supposed to improve 0.0 manufacturing?
With the increases to cost per m3 to JF materials from HS to NS, especially low value materials such as tritanium, the localized ore gathered becomes increasingly viable to use in and around the area where it is gathered. More specialized materials may still need to be JF, but rather than those who are complaining about JF ALL their items from HS it gives more margins for the localized items to be profitable. When you start with an increase in these small items, you give the local economy a foothold to grow from.
A local economy is primarily going to be compromised of these small groups that everyone thinks are now being nerfed, when in fact it gives them a reason to not jump everything to and from HS, and more reason to use what they create from their space. |
Nightingale Actault
Divided Unity
The Night Crew Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 18:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote:Nightingale Actault wrote:
With the increases to cost per m3 to JF materials from HS to NS, especially low value materials such as tritanium, the localized ore gathered becomes increasingly viable to use in and around the area where it is gathered.
Nobody used a JF to move trit. We use mineral compression. Which has always been efficient enough that it was only needed for t1 heavy doctrines. Demand for those (and for caps) far outstrips what you can mine without continuous interruption and without the huge expenses involved with moving ore from refinery to manufacturing outpost. The bulk of my cargo is and has always been things that can not be built locally. Or, to just quote myself: just a few pages back I wrote:
Am I supposed to extract non-local isotopes from my behind? Will non-local T2 materials into being? Found a praying circle to wish for a divine delivery of non-local rig parts? Perform a summoning of faction modules? Sacrifice a newbie in hopes for plentiful datacore harvest? Wish for decryptors?
Yes, some of those items will need to be brought in. Most of those however, are small items (though I do feel your pain with isotopes). Mineral compression going away will still mean that localized gathering of ore becomes exponentially more important. More miners in space means more targets. More targets equals more chances for smaller gang pvp. |
Nightingale Actault
Divided Unity
The Night Crew Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 17:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Aerissa Nolen wrote:A few issues to clarify that I keep seeing repeated, at least in regard to T1 freighters:
- the slight nerf to *default* cargo size comes with the buff of added flexibility and specialization options
I disagree, as I don't have a choice how I will rig. I went with a Charon since ever m3 matters to me. My alts trained Caldari Freighter 5 for the same reason. The current proposed changes mean I must fit at least 2x T2 cargo rigs, or all that investment is lost and I'm worse off.
So you are currently filling each and every freighter to max cargo for every trip? Are you above or below 1 billion isk cargo value? |
| |
|