Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 [80] 90 .. 94 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 19:52:00 -
[2371] - Quote
Hoshi Sorano wrote:I do think that the change from rigs to slots is a good one, both in terms of cost and options. However, I am a bit concerned about the decision to only allow low slots. CCP Fozzie wrote:The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). (boldface added for emphasis) This statement would seem to indicate that using either armor or shield to tank a freighter should be viable options, but the limitation to low slots only means that there really are only options to boost armor. You even list armor tanking modules as an expected choice for freighter pilots. But where are the shield options? Basically, if you're going to start adding slots to freighters, don't do the job halfway; give the ships a full suite of slots and fitting options.
Yeah! I too want to be able to fit a bait Obelisk with a huge tank and a cyno! Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Axe Coldon
41
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 20:10:00 -
[2372] - Quote
Hoshi Sorano wrote:I do think that the change from rigs to slots is a good one, both in terms of cost and options. However, I am a bit concerned about the decision to only allow low slots. CCP Fozzie wrote:The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). (boldface added for emphasis) This statement would seem to indicate that using either armor or shield to tank a freighter should be viable options, but the limitation to low slots only means that there really are only options to boost armor. You even list armor tanking modules as an expected choice for freighter pilots. But where are the shield options? Basically, if you're going to start adding slots to freighters, don't do the job halfway; give the ships a full suite of slots and fitting options.
A mid slot or 2 and a new module that is the equivalent of adaptive nano only for shields. So could still keep cpu and power low to limit what we can put their. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 20:15:00 -
[2373] - Quote
Hiryu Jin wrote:seriously, just admit this was a terrible idea, leave things the way they are and move on to something else.
Might want to rethink that a bit.
After all, getting all the low ends out to null to keep building supers your block relies heavily on.....might want a freighter with as big a cargo hold as you can get. You may have to end up hauling a giant amount of veld to the ore compression array, before jumping it out to null. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Rittel
Band of Valence
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 20:24:00 -
[2374] - Quote
Is there any plan to align all the JF's fuel usage?
If you're going to nerf the Rhea slightly more than the others it seems fair to at least drop its fuel usage per LY slightly. |
NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
844
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 20:31:00 -
[2375] - Quote
Axe Coldon wrote:Hoshi Sorano wrote:I do think that the change from rigs to slots is a good one, both in terms of cost and options. However, I am a bit concerned about the decision to only allow low slots. CCP Fozzie wrote:The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). (boldface added for emphasis) This statement would seem to indicate that using either armor or shield to tank a freighter should be viable options, but the limitation to low slots only means that there really are only options to boost armor. You even list armor tanking modules as an expected choice for freighter pilots. But where are the shield options? Basically, if you're going to start adding slots to freighters, don't do the job halfway; give the ships a full suite of slots and fitting options. A mid slot or 2 and a new module that is the equivalent of adaptive nano only for shields. So could still keep cpu and power low to limit what we can put their. Midslots means ewar Lowslots mean that they cant project anything |
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
210
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 20:32:00 -
[2376] - Quote
3x low slots ftw Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 21:17:00 -
[2377] - Quote
NEONOVUS wrote:Axe Coldon wrote:Hoshi Sorano wrote:I do think that the change from rigs to slots is a good one, both in terms of cost and options. However, I am a bit concerned about the decision to only allow low slots. CCP Fozzie wrote:The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). (boldface added for emphasis) This statement would seem to indicate that using either armor or shield to tank a freighter should be viable options, but the limitation to low slots only means that there really are only options to boost armor. You even list armor tanking modules as an expected choice for freighter pilots. But where are the shield options? Basically, if you're going to start adding slots to freighters, don't do the job halfway; give the ships a full suite of slots and fitting options. A mid slot or 2 and a new module that is the equivalent of adaptive nano only for shields. So could still keep cpu and power low to limit what we can put their. Midslots means ewar Lowslots mean that they cant project anything
Well the modules could be limited as with the low slots. While Hoshi Sorano's request for a full range of slots and fitting options is silly, the notion of allowing at least some shield tanking ability is less so. Of course, the ships that have more shield than armor HP have other characteristics such as being faster or more cargo space. As such, this request may not go anywhere. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Ed Bever
Evolution Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 21:18:00 -
[2378] - Quote
Maybe give them a role bonus to allow fitting warp core stabs? |
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 21:39:00 -
[2379] - Quote
I may have missed it, however: Would it be possible to get CCP to comment on or confirm which set of numbers for the fitted freighters, which are correct, please?
I would like to know what I am commenting on, and Tippia provided one set of numbers, while Red Frog provided another. Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EVE-oconomy and o-kay for you. |
Pyotr Sevastyan
Babylon Knights The Unthinkables
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 22:11:00 -
[2380] - Quote
Cardano Firesnake wrote:You will understand when you will be in 0.0. :-) The fact that the cost to transport thing in low sec and 0.0 have increased is nothing in regard of the gain in 0.0 and low sec. They are boosting the number of ways to make ISK in low sec already. But yes, going to there is risky and have a price... The Rhea is still the ship with the bigger cargo capacity. As Expanded Cargohold II increase the cargo by % you will gain more capacity with the Rhea than with the other ships.... And also... YES!! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3736833#post3736833
Rhea win 1% other JF win 4% => for me is a nerf, almost 5k m3, and with the price of fuel + up the comsumption, Rhea will be not the old Rhea, it will be just an old car who cost extremly expensive in fuel in regards of cargo.
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 22:57:00 -
[2381] - Quote
Pyotr Sevastyan wrote:Cardano Firesnake wrote:You will understand when you will be in 0.0. :-) The fact that the cost to transport thing in low sec and 0.0 have increased is nothing in regard of the gain in 0.0 and low sec. They are boosting the number of ways to make ISK in low sec already. But yes, going to there is risky and have a price... The Rhea is still the ship with the bigger cargo capacity. As Expanded Cargohold II increase the cargo by % you will gain more capacity with the Rhea than with the other ships.... And also... YES!! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3736833#post3736833 Rhea win 1% other JF win 4% => for me is a nerf, almost 5k m3, and with the price of fuel + up the comsumption, Rhea will be not the old Rhea, it will be just an old car who cost extremly expensive in fuel in regards of cargo.
Can you show your numbers here please, for the 1% & 4%?
As for the fuel costs/consumption issues, everyone faces those changes so it isn't like you are being singled out and the JF is still the best deal in town for moving lots of stuff to null or low sec. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Hoshi Sorano
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 23:17:00 -
[2382] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:NEONOVUS wrote:Axe Coldon wrote:Hoshi Sorano wrote:I do think that the change from rigs to slots is a good one, both in terms of cost and options. However, I am a bit concerned about the decision to only allow low slots. CCP Fozzie wrote:The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). (boldface added for emphasis) This statement would seem to indicate that using either armor or shield to tank a freighter should be viable options, but the limitation to low slots only means that there really are only options to boost armor. You even list armor tanking modules as an expected choice for freighter pilots. But where are the shield options? Basically, if you're going to start adding slots to freighters, don't do the job halfway; give the ships a full suite of slots and fitting options. A mid slot or 2 and a new module that is the equivalent of adaptive nano only for shields. So could still keep cpu and power low to limit what we can put their. Midslots means ewar Lowslots mean that they cant project anything Well the modules could be limited as with the low slots. While Hoshi Sorano's request for a full range of slots and fitting options is silly, the notion of allowing at least some shield tanking ability is less so. Of course, the ships that have more shield than armor HP have other characteristics such as being faster or more cargo space. As such, this request may not go anywhere.
How is it any more silly than having all slot types on T1 industrials? The silly part to me is flying giant loot targets around space that (unlike every other ship in this galaxy) can't be properly fit for defense. |
Phugoid
Thee Almitee Ones The Unforgiven Alliance
163
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 23:22:00 -
[2383] - Quote
Ok, seems fair enough. But I do have one big gripe!
Why is the align time being bascially tripled???? Isnt 40 seconds to get to warp long enough as it is? Now at 114 seconds it is absolutely an idiotic change!
Someone please explain the why/how of that decision...... Flugzeugf++hrer |
Valterra Craven
250
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 23:36:00 -
[2384] - Quote
Phugoid wrote:Ok, seems fair enough. But I do have one big gripe! Why is the align time being bascially tripled???? Isnt 40 seconds to get to warp long enough as it is? Now at 114 seconds it is absolutely an idiotic change! Someone please explain the why/how of that decision......
Base Stats vs Skill modifiers. Align time didn't change. |
Halan Devan
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 23:55:00 -
[2385] - Quote
This still seems a massive nerf bat to the groin.
Claiming to offer the ability to customize a ship but then reducing m3 to the order that most of the new changes will go to cargo modules guarantees that most haulers will instantly slap on 2 t2 cargo mods in lows, and one slot to mess with left over isn't going to change much at all.
And increasing the cost for JFs to operate, then saying "hey we will let you use new modules to reduce the fuel costs" sounds highly dubious at beast. For any module to reduce fuel use to a meaningful point they would have to make up for the m3 lost per jump due to cargo amounts lost in the changes.
In other words the m3 per trip/fuel used with a small cargo/high efficency fuel use would have to exceed the idea of using all cargo m3 modules and paying the higher fuel cost in order for players to make that choice. Not to mention offsetting the one trip vs two trip time factor for the player in real life.
Are the fuel costs vs m3 moved really going to be that large of a factor? To offset the 2nd trip and the fuel costs for another trip? We are talking some very large numbers here for fuel reduction. With some JFs having half the cargo according to the posts by CCP is this even feasible, fuel efficiency increasing by over 100% to make up for cost per haul? And that just breaks them even for fuel cost, no mention of making up for the time lost with the 2nd trip to move the same amount that we do now...
I am still of the opinion that the "freighters get rigs" announcement, without any other work done to balance this was a Fanfest publicity stunt that was poorly planned prior to that moment. |
Regan Rotineque
Arch Angels Assault Force The Kadeshi
336
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 23:58:00 -
[2386] - Quote
(insert HallmarkGäó moment)
(tears)
I luvs my new tiny cargo hold freighter with bits of tank and alignment mods
|
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
657
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:06:00 -
[2387] - Quote
I think there is now a healthy place for the one existing faction cargo expander and a few faction nanos. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
14705
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:07:00 -
[2388] - Quote
purple freighter
purple freighter in the skai President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet mk.III-á| Twitch | Imgur | Content \o/ |
Ben Hatton
The Fifth Dimension
10
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:15:00 -
[2389] - Quote
All I can say is that Im really looking forward to the changes, just yesterday I had 2 full Charon loads of Trit to haul and then a 200k m3 m3 high value haul to do. Given the choice I would have fitted all T2 Cargo Exps first and then Tank and warp speed. |
Marsan
226
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:19:00 -
[2390] - Quote
Really with jump freighters given they are intended operate in dangerous space. Why don't they have a better tank? Why don't they have high slots? Really I should be able to install on my JF at least a point defense able to take on a frigate or 2.
Like wise give the freighters some high slots as well. Currently a freighter can be locked down by a newbie frigate without any recourse in LS/NS/WH.
Maybe the min, or ammar ships should get a modest drone able to fit a flight of drones instead of high slots.
Don't get me wrong I'm not asking for battleship level fittings, but more like very low end of cruiser or destroyer dps. Some thing a modestly tanked cruiser, or even well flown frigate can tank for long enough for friends to arrive, and a any well tanked cruiser and above could tank indefinitely. Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community. |
|
Regan Rotineque
Arch Angels Assault Force The Kadeshi
336
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:28:00 -
[2391] - Quote
Go play with the changes on SiSi they are there :)
I can soooo see one of the first KMs is going to be a purple or blue fitted freighter (yes gankers there stuff for you too in these changes)
Being able to fit the armor repper was also a nice surprise :)
Lots of fun
+1 from me overall
though i still think we need to figure out something for the shield tanked freighters there is nothing you can really fit on those to increase resists or shield tank that has zero or 1 CPU. I may be trading in the old Fenrir fleet for some armor tankies. |
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
76
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 00:36:00 -
[2392] - Quote
Marsan wrote:Really with jump freighters given they are intended operate in dangerous space. Why don't they have a better tank? Why don't they have high slots? Really I should be able to install on my JF at least a point defense able to take on a frigate or 2.
Like wise give the freighters some high slots as well. Currently a freighter can be locked down by a newbie frigate without any recourse in LS/NS/WH.
Maybe the min, or ammar ships should get a modest drone able to fit a flight of drones instead of high slots.
Don't get me wrong I'm not asking for battleship level fittings, but more like very low end of cruiser or destroyer dps. Some thing a modestly tanked cruiser, or even well flown frigate can tank for long enough for friends to arrive, and a any well tanked cruiser and above could tank indefinitely.
They do have a better tank. a much better tank. And will get an even better tank if you choose to do with less cargo space. But the best tank for a Jump Freighter is ensuring it avoids trouble to begin with. Because generally, no matter what you tank is, if you're 7 billion ISK ship gets caught it will die just like it was a Supercarrier. |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
231
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 01:14:00 -
[2393] - Quote
HandelsPharmi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: The base EHP of all Freighters and Jump Freighters is being increased (since Expanded Cargoholds affect freighter hp more than cargo rigs do) and more emphasis is being placed on armor and shield than before (although all Freighters still gain the majority of their hitpoints from hull). Note the change in the Jump Freighter HP bonus, which now only applies to their main tank and hull. The large increase in JF base HP and resist more than make up for the bonus change and all JFs have more base EHP than before.
ARK
Slot layout: 0H, 0M, 3(+3)L; Fittings: 3(+2) PWG, 5(+4) CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 12000(+6000) / 63600(+26400) / 96000(-15000) Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 47.5(+7.5) / 62.5(+12.5) Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 34.375(+9.375) / 40(+20)
78 / 71 / 71 / 74 Armor Resistance is possible with a Armor tank without a booster or anything else... this is... amazing I wouldn't be over optimistic about your resists - The resists quoted are wrong - Or have been written our wrongly.
I'm not sure when (armor,exp) 28 + 20 became 40 or when (shield,exp) 55 + 12.5 = 62.5
Not sure if it is bad math or just bad workmanship - Pretty sure though if it were a cheque book he was balancing, he stands a very good chance of being charged with fraud .
Just checked on SISI - Someone needs to fix the information in the OP so those who don't use SISI but would like to know what they are getting, are getting the right information. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 02:14:00 -
[2394] - Quote
SiSi also has base for Rhea at 143,000m3 cargo
OP has 144,000m3
Dunno which is correct honestly.... |
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
881
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 03:19:00 -
[2395] - Quote
Looks like Fozzie blew it on this iteration.
I don't really see balance here.
Freighters had pretty strong stats because they weren't customizable.
1st Iteration was a fair compromise - nerf to stats in exchange for the limited ability to modify them with rigs. EHP could be increased beyond the current freighters, with a cost to cargo. Cargo could be increased above today's freighters, at a cost to EHP. Alignment could also be improved, if the other stats were ignored. Seemed balanced as their capabilities were not significantly different.
2nd iteration grants far cheaper and easier customization (no rig expense). It should have come with a further reduction of the freighters 'raw stats' to account for this.
Instead, now a cargo-fit freighter carries 25% more cargo with only a very slight 3-5% EHP penalty (from Rubicon) to 'pay' for it - with no penalty to current alignment speed. And we get Jump Freighters with 500-600K EHP. A large increase in cargo capacity should be balanced with a significant penalty to alignment and cargo.
Yes, this version is popular with the 'make me invincible' in highsec crowd, if they weren't so busy moaning that they can't fit a DCII.
But I think Fozzie needs to take another look at his spreadsheet, and I hope he realizes that handing out free ice cream cones to freighter pilots might get him a lot of 'likes' but it - doesn't mean its a good iteration.
We don't need another 'mining barge'-style balance round. Time to dial back the stats.
|
Angelique Duchemin
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 03:38:00 -
[2396] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:And a big "screw you" to the people who spent isk hoarding capital cargo rigs. You deserve it for trying to profit on the misery of others. Shed your tears into my bucket, maybe I can use them for some useful stuff.
I wasn't one of them. I am a logistics coordinator.
My "plan" was to wait for the patch to come. Then as all the speculators start dropping their rigs on the market for the big payout. I would buy my rigs in the subsequent price drop after demand has been filled but supply was still in plenty and people start competing to liquidize their investments before the prices normalize.
That was my plan anyway but things changed.
The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity. |
Angelique Duchemin
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 03:43:00 -
[2397] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:Looks like Fozzie blew it on this iteration.
I don't really see balance here.
Freighters had pretty strong stats because they weren't customizable.
1st Iteration was a fair compromise - nerf to stats in exchange for the limited ability to modify them with rigs. EHP could be increased beyond the current freighters, with a cost to cargo. Cargo could be increased above today's freighters, at a cost to EHP. Alignment could also be improved, if the other stats were ignored. Seemed balanced as their capabilities were not significantly different.
2nd iteration grants far cheaper and easier customization (no rig expense). It should have come with a further reduction of the freighters 'raw stats' to account for this.
Instead, now a cargo-fit freighter carries 25% more cargo with only a very slight 3-5% EHP penalty (from Rubicon) to 'pay' for it - with no penalty to current alignment speed. And we get Jump Freighters with 500-600K EHP. A large increase in cargo capacity should be balanced with a significant penalty to alignment and cargo.
Yes, this version is popular with the 'make me invincible' in highsec crowd, if they weren't so busy moaning that they can't fit a DCII.
But I think Fozzie needs to take another look at his spreadsheet, and I hope he realizes that handing out free ice cream cones to freighter pilots might get him a lot of 'likes' but it - doesn't mean its a good iteration.
We don't need another 'mining barge'-style balance round. Time to dial back the stats.
Don't forget that in all of this the fuel cost is still increased by +50% which means that even if they carry 25% more cargo. it will still be 25% less efficient than before.
When it comes to Jump Freighters. Fuel cost means everything. Cargo space barely means anything it all. It's all down to how many M3 of space you squeeze out of every isotope.
The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 04:20:00 -
[2398] - Quote
Hoshi Sorano wrote:
How is it any more silly than having all slot types on T1 industrials? The silly part to me is flying giant loot targets around space that (unlike every other ship in this galaxy) can't be properly fit for defense.
You should not be able to fit a huge tank on a freighter (seriously, do the math on a freighter with both low and mid slots and able to fit a DCU II in the lows as well...you'd have a huge ass tank...unless CCP nerfed the base tank to practically nothing...so maybe you should STFU....), ewar and a cyno, IMO. That is just silly. With the proposed changes you can fit for tank, cargo...and well not exactly speed but something a bit faster than current.
And we aren't talking about a T1 industrial, but a freighter which already comes with a substantial amount of EHP right out of the box. With 3 low slots and some module options you can boost that EHP quite a bit too. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 04:27:00 -
[2399] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:Looks like Fozzie blew it on this iteration.
I don't really see balance here.
Freighters had pretty strong stats because they weren't customizable.
1st Iteration was a fair compromise - nerf to stats in exchange for the limited ability to modify them with rigs. EHP could be increased beyond the current freighters, with a cost to cargo. Cargo could be increased above today's freighters, at a cost to EHP. Alignment could also be improved, if the other stats were ignored. Seemed balanced as their capabilities were not significantly different.
2nd iteration grants far cheaper and easier customization (no rig expense). It should have come with a further reduction of the freighters 'raw stats' to account for this.
Instead, now a cargo-fit freighter carries 25% more cargo with only a very slight 3-5% EHP penalty (from Rubicon) to 'pay' for it - with no penalty to current alignment speed. And we get Jump Freighters with 500-600K EHP. A large increase in cargo capacity should be balanced with a significant penalty to alignment and cargo.
Yes, this version is popular with the 'make me invincible' in highsec crowd, if they weren't so busy moaning that they can't fit a DCII.
But I think Fozzie needs to take another look at his spreadsheet, and I hope he realizes that handing out free ice cream cones to freighter pilots might get him a lot of 'likes' but it - doesn't mean its a good iteration.
We don't need another 'mining barge'-style balance round. Time to dial back the stats.
Look everyone, here we have a high sec freighter ganker who is moaning in his cheerios about having to work harder.
I love your 25% more cargo space with only a slight nerf to EHP....as if people were filling up their freighters in the first place....well the smart people that is.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2408
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 04:32:00 -
[2400] - Quote
Halan Devan wrote:This still seems a massive nerf bat to the groin.
Claiming to offer the ability to customize a ship but then reducing m3 to the order that most of the new changes will go to cargo modules guarantees that most haulers will instantly slap on 2 t2 cargo mods in lows, and one slot to mess with left over isn't going to change much at all.
I have to ask...WTF are you hauling? Low end high volume crap that nobody cares about?
Really, I'm quite curious...I have almost never ever filled up my JF with stuff let alone my obelisk...the issue of reduced cargo space is not really a binding constraint. Maybe if I was doing logistics for my alliance and filling up the JF before jumping to null and docking up, but other than that running around empire I have never ever run into the cargo hold limit....ever. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 [80] 90 .. 94 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |