| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DubanFP
Caldari
Four Rings
Myriad Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.03.29 21:52:00 -
[31]
Edited by: DubanFP on 29/03/2007 21:49:27
I think they're capped at 3900 because they don't want people hauling PoS modules "which are 4000m3" in less space for whatever reason. Since cargo cans take up less room then they hold.
Though I think larger containers for anchoring that don't get this bonus would be a good idea.
______________________
Interested? |
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.29 21:59:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Michael McNeil
3) provides a economic boost to freighters as no industral ship can move more then 30k.
Note to self... recheck the Cargo on my Tricked out Iteron V... 5 Cargo 2's and 3 Gargo rigs... 38.443K M3...
I like the idea of a 30K M3 Can that:
a) Holds 39 K M3... (10 times the size of a GSC)
b) Can not be recovered once deployed...
c) Will not survive the server Down Time if deployed...
d) Can be Player Build (BPO's available)
e) Unable to be opened prior to Deployment/Anchoring
Noob in training...
|
Ender Atreides
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 02:56:00 -
[33]
I agree!
|
Professor Nero
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 03:07:00 -
[34]
I'm sure that the developers have seen the need for the larger secure cans. There must be some explanation as to why it hasn't been done yet.
If they do make them available, it would be nice to have them unanchor themselves after 24 hours. Then they can be scooped and taken back to a station to be reprocessed and have their contents looted.
|
xttz
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 03:11:00 -
[35]
Personally I'd be happy with seeded station container blueprints to allow them to be used in outposts. Organising your property into a multitude of GSCs is hell.
|
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 03:19:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Rakeris
What about TomBs Ego?
Won't fit in anything (had to bring back a classic)
|
Lienzo
Amanuensis
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 06:32:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Lienzo on 30/03/2007 06:29:27
How about a bigger can that cannot be anchored near a belt or left open in an industrial?
"I have not been podded and run out of isk. I am merely camping my hangar." |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 06:39:00 -
[38]
and... if freighters could deploy their huge contis...?
only in low-sec though 
|
Bellac
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 07:40:00 -
[39]
It would of course mean the end of the clouds of 3900m3 cans at all the belts in empire. Then there would be one less excuse for the oodles of lag at belts.
Seriously though this chestnut has been roasting for at least 2 years. There was calls for a seriously big deployable secure can before the giant cans where even in game, and IIRC the giant cans was a partial fix to the requests. Then later all the anchoring thing came along and buggered them up a bit further (you used to be able to drop many cans at the same spot) and here we still are many years later with the same problem.
I fail to see what the big problem is by having a can with 27500m3 of storage space that can be deplyed in space at belts. Maybe the devs just want to encourage conflict and confrontation at every turn, and this is just a good way of doing it. Make the can big enough that you need a Transport to deploy it and then there will not be huge clouds of them about.
IIRC jet can mining was never intended to be part of the game but was a clever work around, and I just hope that the lack of a real workable solution to this problem is not sour grapes
|
Sgt Blade
Save Yourself Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.03.30 08:34:00 -
[40]
why dont you like... jet can mine.... those cans hold lots and are free and no hassle 
that and you should have enough protection to stop any ore theives anyways so
Hypnotic Pelvic Thrusting Level 5 |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |