CCP if youwant to choose between several setup to carry more load, more tank or more speed etc
why don't you forget about rigs and add low slots instead. Rigs are expensive refit !

So this put me off buying a jf :( a lowslot for dcu would be nice mate hi for cloak but this radical ideas but more practical

You're seriously trying to run to the moral high-ground after:


Top lel. That's some pretty revisionist thinking there.

The problem is, when you repeatedly say such openly naive things as "needless expense" without conflating that to being the same thing as an incentive not to, I know the problem is you don't want to change, yet see the need to do so. Compression-importing doesn't replace compression-importing via 425mm railguns and you know it.

When we accept that yes, CCP are using a stick, we can also see that CCP are using a carrot. Here, you said it yourself: "The industry changes provide benefits to production within null".

Soooooooooo....

We have added costs and effort of importing, as well as benefits to doing it in nullsec. What does that give us?

Your argument is nonsensical not because you are stupid, but because you are knowingly arguing a position out of self interest, rather than what is actually happening.

That would still mean you get these nerfs.

This is certainly valid criticism of what it seems CCP are trying to do, but I'm not prepared to be a raving opponent to all change because I can't guarantee it will always work out best for me.
If anything, in this case I am rather hopeful of good systemic changes, as CCP are definitely slow-cooking these changes.

I'd rather support the changes than adopt a very defeatist "CCP won't get it right, so why change anything" style position.

CCP add low slot and we will forgive you.

http://i.imgur.com/b4obsew.png

technically,all freighters are now pretty much the same in capacity. You can have better cargo or same cargo with very little improvement of hull HP with 1 hull rig...

JF are .... well ... plug the cargo rig because you d'ont have really the choice... As you don't change rig often !!!

CCP add low slot and we will forgive you.

Now that I think about it, if the changes are kept EXACTLY how they are and you add a low slot then this would be acceptable. A T2 Inertia stab would make up for the massive agility nurf and then the rigs would make up for the cargo nurf. Other wise, this is still an absolutely awful change.

EDIT: Talking about for JF, regular freighters I don't really care about either way.

Conceptual question: the focus has thus far been on cargo capacity. The premise that they needed to nerf base capacity because some players might up their capacity. But is top-end capacity, within reason, really the big issue? Is the ability to haul "moar" stuff from here to there really what focus was on when they considered and approved rigs?

I just don't see cargo capacity, past a certain point, that significant to force projection or hurting the game. It's a necessary evil in order to keep higher-level game functionality operating.

When I first heard the announcement for rigs, my first inclination was that this was really a response to the generic tanks on freighters. See an Obelisk and know: this much DPS needed to kill it before Concord responds. Call it an Anti-Burn Jita change. Not just BJ, but throwing a bit of a wrinkle into everyday hisec ganking. But in the end, I don't think it is going to work out like that. Yes, I know you could add some tank rigs. But with such a major hit to base capacity, that probably won't be the outcome. I just don't see capacity being the issue, no matter what level its at. Cargo value comes into play much more than top-end capacity in most circumstances. The rest, meh. I think their concern over "moar cargo" was a bit much.

Conceptual question: the focus has thus far been on cargo capacity. The premise that they needed to nerf base capacity because some players might up their capacity. But is top-end capacity, within reason, really the big issue? Is the ability to haul "moar" stuff from here to there really what focus was on when they considered and approved rigs?

I just don't see cargo capacity, past a certain point, that significant to force projection or hurting the game. It's a necessary evil in order to keep higher-level game functionality operating.

When I first heard the announcement for rigs, my first inclination was that this was really a response to the generic tanks on freighters. See an Obelisk and know: this much DPS needed to kill it before Concord responds. Call it an Anti-Burn Jita change. Not just BJ, but throwing a bit of a wrinkle into everyday hisec ganking. But in the end, I don't think it is going to work out like that. Yes, I know you could add some tank rigs. But with such a major hit to base capacity, that probably won't be the outcome. I just don't see capacity being the issue, no matter what level its at. Cargo value comes into play much more than top-end capacity in most circumstances. The rest, meh. I think their concern over "moar cargo" was a bit much.

Now that I think about it, if the changes are kept EXACTLY how they are and you add a low slot then this would be acceptable. A T2 Inertia stab would make up for the massive agility nurf and then the rigs would make up for the cargo nurf. Otherwise, this is still an absolutely awful change. I still think that this should not have even been considered in the first place.

EDIT: Talking about for JF, regular freighters I don't really care about either way.

No one would fit an istab to that low slot. They'd always fit a cargo expander, every time.

Then, they'd have to reduce the cargohold further to compensate. No thanks.

[

Its to stop us shipping capitals into jita.

That would still mean you get these nerfs.

Increasing repackaged values of capital ships and sov upgrade mods is one sql query away.

Yes but you will have a choice with refit in your cargo.. I don't bring up a collection of T2 capital rigs usely...

I just don't see cargo capacity, past a certain point, that significant to force projection or hurting the game. It's a necessary evil in order to keep higher-level game functionality operating.

Now that I think about it, if the changes are kept EXACTLY how they are and you add a low slot then this would be acceptable.

See this post people?

Its posts like the one above that got us this nerf.

Cargo capacity was always the limiting factor.
Initially they couldn't give freighters rigs or modules because that would allow them to transport capitals into highsec. They (somewhat) mitigated here by increasing the size of repackaged caps, but that has follow-on effects for all the stuff in the game that has to deal with those capships and it is still a limiting factor that puts an upper bound on how much they can allow us to modify our freighters.

GǪand that's the easy one. Everything else is part of a complex balance structure where you don't want to make ships too strong or too capable compared to everything else flying out there, and freighters were in a very good spot already. So any net buff would have to be mirrored by a net nerf.

If they added a low slot, it would be unacceptable to keep the changes the way they are GÇö they would have to reduce everything even further (and add more stuff to the nerf list) to compensate for all the additional abilities, exactly like they've already done to compensate for the rigs.

I'm not sure why that's difficult for you to understand. You could remove all of those things you're nitpicking about and the points would still stand, whereas if we removed the insults and attacks on person/affiliation from your argument we would be left with nothing supporting what you're saying.

...Not to mention, they'll never want it to be fully self-contained anyway because that negates the resource benefits of certain spaces. Kinda what I was pointing the **** out by asking you:

"And that lines up with having certain resources necessary for production only available in certain space how?"

Importing is still currently needed. They have incentivized null production, however they have DISINCENTIVIZED the logistics necessary to ACTUALLY DO SO. That means a low adoption rate by their users, which means having to fix the **** up later on and pushes off actually making any self-contained production in null viable.

This is exactly why I have been saying for the 7 posts I made before that one, that these changes are bad to begin with and CCP should leave JF and freighters the way they are.