|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3622
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 02:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was looking forward to the ADDED CHOICE these changes would bring, but instead they REMOVE CHOICE
Pre-Kronos Charon: 785,000 Post-Kronos Charon: 550,000
Post-Kronos Rigs: Rig 1: No choice - Capital Cargohold Optimization II (20% for 660,000), -150 Calibration Rig 2: No choice - Capital Cargohold Optimization II (20% for 792,000), -150 Calibration Rig 3: Capital Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I, -50 Calibration Cost: 1.45 billion ISK at current market prices [likely higher post-Kronos]
Can't fit a structure rig as it will reduce cargohold /facepalm |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3624
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 04:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
As an industrialist, I find it really telling that all the proposed industry changes make me want to stop doing industry.
CCP Seagull wrote:There are some people who make things work - they pre-fit ships for a fleet op, they run mega-spreadsheets for the industry production lines needed to equip the war effort, build tools to manage a corporation or command large fleets. Their activities enable others to have fun in EVE. What we have here is a failure to communicate. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3624
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 04:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:This is completely in line with what CCP intends for all ships. They're forcing you to make a choice which will require you to think for yourself. More choices are almost always a good addition to the game. No, they are removing choice.
I'd be all for adding choice. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3624
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 04:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
More useful would have been: 1 rig slot and 15% reduction to cargo, NO OTHER CHANGES. At least this gives choice. * Same cargo as before with T1. * More cargo than before at huge expense of T2. * Less cargo with benefit of non-cargo rig. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3624
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 05:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:I can't help but notice that this change to jump freighters isn't any kind of jump drive nerf or removal.
when are jump drives and bridges being nerfed? they're probably the most overpowered thing in game currently, so I'm guessing it's a fairly high priority and will be happening soon. (j/k the council of nullsec wouldn't allow it) Nerfing jump drives wouldn't change anything. It would only make things more un-fun, and increase the number of cyno alts. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3624
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 05:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:actually it wouldn't. logistics is currently immune to pvp, even though this is a pvp game. currently you can't even prevent a JF or capital from travelling if you're in empire space. you certainly can't kill it one at all. Huh?
TrouserDeagle wrote:by removing the tackle immunity from siege/triage, needing a cyno to be up for a time before it can be jumped to, and making jumping be a proess which takes time and can be cancelled by tackling, removing 100mn prop exploits from caps and web instawarping, probably adding minimum jump range constraints (like on pos) to stations and yeah I guess a nice jump range nerf (did I forget anything), jump drives would be less silly. oh, and bridging and pos titans would need to be horribly ruined in some way as well, but I've not thought about that. I'd also like to see jump freighters lose their jump drives and turn into tanky stabbed freighters or something, and see massively reduced hauling abilities on caps. basically I think forcing people to do freighter runs would be really neat, and add to the game. None of that would change anything. If an alliance needs to move from X to Y, they will. It will just require more alts, and be a bigger PITA. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3630
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 17:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ok thanks to the goodposters in this thread so far. I'll definitely be taking the feedback here into account. I currently own 4 Charons and 2 Rhea.
Fozzie, how about rig drawback role bonuses? This way you could have finer control over the effects to freighters vs. jump freighters. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3630
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'm seeing some good feedback about the unique role of Jump Freighters meaning that they don't get much benefit from rigs other than cargo rigs, and this is indeed a problem that limits player choice. I'm going to bring up a few ways to help solve that issue with the other designers early next week. You do realize that the PRIMARY REASON people use freighters / jump freighters is because of their cargo capacity, right?
Of course cargo is a priority! Otherwise smaller cargo ships would be used, like Orca or carrier / Rorqual.
There should be no surprise that any proposed reduction of cargo is going to result in a huge backlash against it.
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3633
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 05:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:High sec folks should not care about this because you cannot efficiently fill a freighter with anything useful and stay below the 1b ISK mark, except maybe shrink-wrapped, unpackaged ships. You've obviously never hauled. You can fill a Charon with hisec ores and ices, and be well under 1b.
I own 4 Charons (soon 5) primarily for hauling Tritanium, and it takes several trips just for that. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3641
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 17:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote: 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.
then you're forcing all freighters to armour tank. They could still hull tank with bulkheads, but I still think that the best method of doing that would be to alter bulkhead fitting requirements and just make sure a DC would be out of reach for what you can get onto a freigther. So I really wonder what the effects would be if bulkheads became free to fit. Are any ships that could currently benefit from fitting them barred from doing so? Are there any ships where it's currently impossible to do so and where making it possible to fit bulkheads would massively alter their balance? 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. |
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3642
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 17:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
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. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3642
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 17:48:00 -
[12] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Eve has no understanding of 'only these modules' or 'but not that class of ship' Erm... you sure?
* Covert cloaking device * Covert cyno * Bomb Launcher * Interdiction sphere launcher * Warp disruption field generator * Siege module * Triage module * Industrial core * Clone vat * Gang link
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3644
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 19:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:It's saying that you can make the trip require less fuel, but you will not be able to use it to increase your jump range... so the same trip will be less expensive. Of course you can put fuel in your cargohold too. The fuel bay doesn't limit a JF. Still there is a cost. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3645
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 22:19:00 -
[14] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: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! *smells cake that will be eaten too* Prepare for crow.
The great thing about being a pessimist is never being disappointed. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3650
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 17:58:00 -
[15] - Quote
So with rigs I could fit 2x T2 and regain what I already had, plus gain a "utility" rig.
Now even that isn't possible.
Maybe it is just me, but I still don't see any point to all of this. I was happy with my fleet of Charons and Rheas as-is. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3650
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 18:19:00 -
[16] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:Tippia wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Tippia wrote:Providence: 350k EHP + 383k m-¦ Ark: 577k EHP(!) + 118k m-¦ Any of these strike your fancy? Oh trust me, they do! Until I see *Final* numbers and on TQ, I'm not changing any skillque... Pff. What's this GÇ£being sensibleGÇ¥ stuff you're doing. Getoutahere! On a more serious note, these are the base tank stats I'm calculating from. Can anyone check to see if I've missed something because it doesn't seem like itGǪ These are the base stats from the OP, and the effective EHP for each tier includes skills at V (so +25% from Mechanics, Hull Upgrades, and Shield Mgt, and +50% for the JFs). How are you calculating the sehp and aehp? those seem really off. Below was my ehp for each of the 4 damage types for the shield of the fenrir. em 48000 therm 57600 kin 67200 exp 72000 edit: these were calculated with the following equation ehp = base+[base * (resist/100)] EHP = base / (1 - Resist Percent) |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3650
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 18:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Math is hard....
Charon:
Average Shield EHP = 50000 * (0.25 / (1 - 0% EM) + 0.25 / (1 - 20% Th) + 0.25 / (1 - 40% Kin) + 0.25 / (1 - 50% EX)) = 73958.33
Average Armor EHP = 15000 * (0.25 / (1 - 50% EM) + 0.25 / (1 - 45% Th) + 0.25 / (1 - 25% Kin) + 0.25 / (1 - 10% EX)) = 23484.84
Average Hull EHP = 77500 * (0.25 / (1 - 0% EM) + 0.25 / (1 - 0% Th) + 0.25 / (1 - 0% Kin) + 0.25 / (1 - 0% EX)) = 50000
Total Average EHP = 147443.17 (pre-Kronos 146438.13) |
|
|
|