Its role bonus makes no sense you state its designed for high sec and give it a role bonus that cant be used in high sec unless im missing something you cant use bridges/jump in high sec

i was reading evenews24 and someone posted a idea about changing the role bonus to X reduction in mass when transiting through a wormhole.

This idea sounds good it will open the ship up to all areas from high to null and even wormhole space as not only a transport ship but a spearhead in a attack by moving in large amount of ships for a quick shock and awe strike

however unlike haulers this carries fitted ships, making it more like a carrier than a hauler, just saying.

SO not true CCP Rise - it was only after tons of screaming and 404 pages that CCP Greyscale backed off a bit and gave in about JF's and logistics.

Anyway that aside - very excited to see this ship enter game and the opportunities and content it will generate!


.... so where's that image of the ship you were looking for?

Yes, after reading some posts, please removed the jump fatigue reduction. Can't have null guys Titan bridging these things everywhere. These are high sec ships, or ships to be used locally in deep blue space like freighters are used in null (with the exception of their moving gigantic system upgrades around by Titan bridging - something that needs to change). And same goes for a T2 version for moving caps that I suggested a few posts back.

Actually, these things should have a role penalty that makes them generate 10 times MORE fatigue. Especially for any future version that might move capital ships - lore reason would be that if a ship is cyno'd that contains active jump/gate drives, the space-time continuum gets messed up or something. Kinda like John Malkovich going through his own portal.

it's actually harmful since it increases the unmodified time it takes you to get into warp.

If you'll read back a bit I am trying to ensure that these ships are set up conceptually to be locked into a specific role in the hope that one day CCP may consider a T2 version of the ship that can move fitted caps.

I'm just trying to ensure that the concept of a fitted ship mover is established from the beginning so if they want to play with and expand upon it in the future they can confidently do so.

Also, everybody is just thinking of this thing in terms of 3 battleships. I am an industrialist who has previously in my eve career been tasked with providing 100 fitted Atrons to make available on alliance contract. Don't be so narrow-minded. These things will be doing more than just moving 3 battleships. Given that there is a fairly large potential use for these things, I think their role should be firmly cemented as high sec non-bridged movers from the beginning.

Doesn't it take you more time to reach 75% of your max as your max increases, or does the acceleration also rise so that the overall time stays the same?

Genuinely curious.

Arguments re: fatigue in this thread are funny because they imply that fatigue reduction is tantamount to the complete elimination of fatigue in general. This is patently false GÇö even fatigue bonused ships must wait before jumping, and have their ability to travel significantly hampered by fatigue. Don't believe me? Go do a jump freighter run on Serenity right now, and then do one on Tranquility later.

I don't doubt you, what I dislike is the undermining the message of the mechanic - why add more bonused hulls? At all? Even taking you at your word (and I do, for clarity) there is almost no POINT in it being bonused.

They are trying to limit projection and teleporting around the map - what message does the first new hull since the change having a reduction bonus send?

By their own admission, it is a high sec intended vessel - what harm would it not being fatigue reduced bring? Particularly if they are as useless as you've shown for rapid deployment? Then the message of "teleporting travel is dying" is retained.




You miss my point - I wasn't talking about the devs, I was talking about null logistics chains - you cannot cry about the "removal" of something you never had. That would be like moaning about ABCs "losing" MMJDs.

If a new ship is added without reduction bonuses, how can you reasonably state that breaks current logistic chains?

SEE?
even Santa knows that's a bad idea LOL

o/ Santa

Celly Smunt

The higher a ship's max speed is, the faster it has to be going for the warp drive to kick in.

The max speed bonus should be replaced with an agility bonus IMHO

:)

Celly Smunt

I never said it did, I simply commented on Santa's post/question about the result of a higher max speed being taking longer to go into warp, which is a bad idea in my opinion and evidently in his as well.

o/
Celly Smunt

PS. not talking about the mwd trick, just base ships only differing in the pilot's skills.

So it is effectively a JF with more cargo room?
How far can it jump because if it is only as far as a carrier...might as well use a carrier.
If on the other hand its cargo was a lot more then 3 fitted BS say 4-5 then I could see it being used.

That being said...any new ships are welcomed

because criminal activity should in no way be possible to be a permanent career.

Then on the flip, why shouldn't it be that way?

Now come back to me when you've run the numbers for people that are not caught after repeatedly doing the same activity for decades or more. Keep in mind that those numbers are for all crimes, which a lot of them could be once or a few times.

Sorry, but that's not how debates work. I've offered an argument with supporting evidence as to why something shouldn't be a certain way. If you want to make a point other than just to say you are wrong, then go ahead, but otherwise I'm not interested in anything else.

My arguement is that hi sec ganking should not be a permanent career.
My supporting evidence is that in today's world criminals are not given limitless chances to change their ways. Eventually courts say enough is enough. There's a reason that the the 3 strikes policy for criminals exists.

That's what I said in my original post and thats what I've been arguing since.

So I've made a modified version of what actually took place.
A. Made a statement
B. Gave supporting arguments
C. People argued that this was naive and would break the game.
D. I offered more examples as to why this wasn't naive and wouldn't break the game.

You've done nothing of the sort. so good day.

Closed for a bit of fall cleaning.

build cost then

I feel bad for ORE. all the ships they build get owned. you'd think they'd start putting an emphasis on tank.

Sigh...


after being trolled or at best ridiculed for making this statement earlier, I am going to make it again.


Honestly, all that I see here with the requests for "drones for defense", "more ehp", more "fitting slots" and a high sec version of a carrier.

and by adding the "jump drive" request coupled with the reduction in fatigue that an "industrial" class ship gets is just an un-nerfed version of an existing carrier with a little larger sma and less drone damage.

so in null sec: force projection could still be somewhat more viable than what it is now with safely jumped sub caps for fighting pilots and a 90% reduction in fatigue to the bowhead pilot.

and in high sec; folks are wanting the ship to be virtually ungankable and honestly, that's neither realistic, nor is it true to the core of the game.

jmho

o/
Celly Smunt

So, if you need 3 characters, one for freighter one for web and one to scout... why would you even fly the bowhead instead of flying the 3 BSs at the same time?

Forcing law abiding citizens to become criminals to defend themselves against criminals is broken. And yes, I am the good guys....I've never once committed a criminal act in the game. Keep trying.

You owe me a new monitor because I spit my drink out laughing at this and I don't feel like cleaning it.

Love it.. An Ore freighter with no ore hold...

Hmm.. perhaps the name should be "ship freighter" ?

Z

Because the ship with fatigue bonus will just eliminate certain aspects of the jump changes - which isn't the purpose of it. I read and watched the thread a long time and more and more it went into the usual direction: change stuff to the good of null players mainly. Capitals are restricted as well can't be used in high sec - so having it the other way round for certain ships isn't a bad thing either.

Which is why no bonus would not change a thing if you would be right about it - but the reactions to the suggestion show already the opposite

I don't need to be right - i am simply stating one opinion in the pool of many. Removing the jump fatigue bonus will not change the ship itself but simply ensure that its main usage will not be as a null sec ship to circumvent other mechanics. Any other scenario you could think of remains untouched. And so far all the disagreement comes from the same coalition group only ;)

You did not explain anything - you stated your opinion - which i simply dont share.

don't know if this have been said or not but...

on sisi it say you need 75 capital cargo bays to build the ship

wouldn't it make more sense for the bp to use capital ship maintenance bays instead

just saying it's a ship shipping ships

CCP Rise should we expect to see a non Jump drive version that increases the ship maintenance array capacity? This being that you can not use a cyno in highsec. The Jump drive seams like a waste for non lowsec / null / WH players.