Originally by: Jonathan Xavier

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Lord Dynastron

---

Originally by: Dark Shikari

---

The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.

---

Bingo

---

Could someone please sumarize the ways to defend a freighter (all of which are listed in this thread) for the morons who can't be assed to read the entire thread?

I can't deal with people like this anymore...

/me goes off to blow something up.

/Ki

---

Ok - I'll give it a go:

Remote repping BS escort - Not practical due to insane cap usage of remote reps. Most battleships will get one, maybe two cycles before they cap out. Can easily be mitgated by the addition of additional ganking BSes.
Smartbombing BS escort - Dangerous to the escort pilot, and not guaranteed to work
Logistic ship escort - Not everyone has people that can jump in one of these at the drop of a hat.

Yes, it is possible to defend freighters in empire. It is just that it is not realistic to do a full corporation escort operation every time the freighter undocks in 1.0 space.

The big problem here, is that corporations with no active war decs are forced to escort freighters through high security empire the way that they would through 0.0. With the apparent ease of a freighter gank, there is little difference between bringing a freighter through a busy system in empire or 0.0.

As it is right now there are hundreds (or maybe thousands) of mundane frieghter runs done through empire daily, for logistical reasons. Making them all targets will increase the cost of goods for everyone. The risk / reward calculation is totally out of whack for this element of gameplay. A freighter pilot moving simple trade goods or minerals from point A to point B will make only a few percent profit for the several hour trip. While this can be profitable, it can't really afford paying dedicated wingmen for several hours of their time.

So get your corpmates to do it! Right, the eight to ten frieghters some larger corporations have running around empire every day just to keep the wheels of a 0.0 corporation greased would mean the corporation would have to live in empire, just to escort its freighters. It's just not practical to require a 5-6 BS escort fleet on every freighter trip through empire.

Flying a freighter is boring, arduous work for little pay. It literally is the backbone of the eve economy. By prohibiting frieghters from moving bulk materials and construction parts through empire without tedious escort duty, everything will increase in price. Don't grief the pilots.

Lastly, I think being able to get loot from freighters is great. Killing freighters is a huge blow to any corporation. Instead of attacking them in a suicide gank, get them with a wardec. Perhaps put a restriction on ship size for pilots in NPC corps (i.e. NPC corp infrastructure unable to support the undocking procedures and servicing costs of capital ships) would get all freighter pilots into wardeccable corporations. Fine, then if you want to kill a freighter, war dec the corp driving it. Until then, don't make it profitable and easy to kill freighters in high-sec.

As I said before, allowing freighters to trade cargo space for security seems like a fair fix to prevent them from being randomly attacked in high-security space by pirates. If you want to make them a bigger target yet, get freighters out of NPC corporations.

---

Originally by: Illyria Ambri

---

And stop the multi quote posts.. just quote the person you are responding to.
I hate scrolling half a screen of quote to get to a single sentence answer.

---

Originally by: Tortun Nahme

---

Originally by: Illyria Ambri

---

And stop the multi quote posts.. just quote the person you are responding to.
I hate scrolling half a screen of quote to get to a single sentence answer.

---

quit agreeing with me! we are mortal enemies

---

Originally by: Trind2222

---

Hope this will limit amout of freighters in jita is so anoying when you undock stasion whit 6 freighters outside.

---

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire

---

Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/04/2007 15:45:08

Don't tell me go get a scout and check whether there is a gate gank next door because there is no way for a freighter to defensively tank a gank long enough for Concord or MWD/warp away to a station. You do not look for trouble. Trouble finds you.

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

It's a balance issue, can't you see that? You get insane amounts of cargo space. The trade off is that you can't defend yourself, but must rely on others to do that for you. Give a freighter slots and you'll have a majorly imbalanced creation.

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

Why can you have a shield on everything from a frig to a titan but not on a freighter? also Turrets are externally mounted, what you cant find room on a freighter to mount one?

---

Again, balance.

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Surely you can see a problem with a freighter that could be used for mining? I mean, seriously...

---

Originally by: Gaius Kador

---

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire

---

Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/04/2007 15:45:08

Don't tell me go get a scout and check whether there is a gate gank next door because there is no way for a freighter to defensively tank a gank long enough for Concord or MWD/warp away to a station. You do not look for trouble. Trouble finds you.

---

Sounds to me you have an issue, and that issue is not having a scout ;)

---

Originally by: Devious

---

Well time to put my two cents in, and i know those Dev's do listen to me. many idea's ive put forward have become reality, for freighters dont give them low slots or mid slots or even high slots. Give them Reinforced mode. Strontium reinforced like those dreads have. the ability to take a pounding while not going anywhere for about 10 minutes. goodbye freighter gank squads , hello Active Piloting of these slow ships, anyone that plonks a freighter on autopilot has to much free time in eve and deserves to be ganked, a simple module that when a pilot is awake and flying the freighter can turn on. End of Topic really.

---

Originally by: frihetskjemper

---

Invincible bad for EVE.

---

Quote:

---

No misfortune is so bad that whining about it won't make it worse

---

Originally by: Rod Blaine

---

1. its not griefing.
2. its not a problem.

Sure, you can't escort in high sec.
You can however scout.

If there's 20 AAA bs's sitting at a gate on a well-tavelled route in high sec then o-m-g it's so damn hard to guess what they're doing there isn't it ?

All ths really does is punish those travelling afk. Those are the ones that'll get picked off this way, and that's not a part of the playerbase I feel particularly sorry for.

---

Originally by: Dylatar

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Not an argument. Stated often in this thread but simply corrected by just increasing size of repackaged capital ships. And on the other hand: expanders reduce hull hp, which again makes a freigher more vulnerable and slower as it already is. Nobody who wants to prevent that would do this. And in my own opinion not necessary. Most time I haven't loaded my freighter full up to the rooftop. That makes cargo expanders the very last thing I would fit to a freighter.

---

Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou

---

Do drones work like pets?

---

Originally by: David Hackworth

---

ò If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly.

---

Originally by: Dred'Pirate Jesus

---

Originally by: cuteboylookingatyou

---

Do drones work like pets?

---

---

Originally by: Akoudoulos

---

Originally by: Velsharoon

---

Escorts them

---

and how this can work?

20-30 bs can almost instapop a freighter :) no matter how many escort pilots you have its is impossible to defend the freighter lag+concord does the job

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Dylatar

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Not an argument. Stated often in this thread but simply corrected by just increasing size of repackaged capital ships. And on the other hand: expanders reduce hull hp, which again makes a freigher more vulnerable and slower as it already is. Nobody who wants to prevent that would do this. And in my own opinion not necessary. Most time I haven't loaded my freighter full up to the rooftop. That makes cargo expanders the very last thing I would fit to a freighter.

---

Decrease the cargosize of freighters and give them enough lowslots to fully compensate that loss with cargoexpanders IF they think that's a good idea.
Make a new Freighter-DCU with 70-80% resist on structure for the pilots who are willing to trade some cargocapacity for a tank.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Dylatar

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Not an argument. Stated often in this thread but simply corrected by just increasing size of repackaged capital ships. And on the other hand: expanders reduce hull hp, which again makes a freigher more vulnerable and slower as it already is. Nobody who wants to prevent that would do this. And in my own opinion not necessary. Most time I haven't loaded my freighter full up to the rooftop. That makes cargo expanders the very last thing I would fit to a freighter.

---

Decrease the cargosize of freighters and give them enough lowslots to fully compensate that loss with cargoexpanders IF they think that's a good idea.
Make a new Freighter-DCU with 70-80% resist on structure for the pilots who are willing to trade some cargocapacity for a tank.

---

Some of you is vaguely aware that using any weapon/offensive module on a capital in high sec is an exploit, and that if reported will get a warning to the offender and the capship will be moved in low sec?

---

Originally by: Nito Musashi

---

So now they are to get ganked loose half the load, then have the escorts gank the alt that picks up the load loose another half of the load, is this all getting silly?

I stand by my solution because it makes sense, its logical and it does not change the basic game mechanics, if your afk flying you can still get ganked, if you want someone dead you can still do it, and the risk free gank squad tactics become more risky if freighter pilot x is not afk and can tell his corp mates and friends that hes got a flagged target.

Passive scanning in empire makes absolutely no sense what so ever, there is no innocent purpose to passive scanning in empire period. If there is one please tell me i would love to hear it. Alts using them during war decs to scan opposition risk free, gankers using them to find targets worth suiciding over risk free. Make it flaggable already and kill two birds with one stone.

All you hc players whine on about risk vs reward, and how everything in eve should be weighted by it, yet this situation you turn a blind eye on because freighter pilots are rich or annoying or whatever. Be consistant at lest.

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Dylatar

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Not an argument. Stated often in this thread but simply corrected by just increasing size of repackaged capital ships. And on the other hand: expanders reduce hull hp, which again makes a freigher more vulnerable and slower as it already is. Nobody who wants to prevent that would do this. And in my own opinion not necessary. Most time I haven't loaded my freighter full up to the rooftop. That makes cargo expanders the very last thing I would fit to a freighter.

---

Decrease the cargosize of freighters and give them enough lowslots to fully compensate that loss with cargoexpanders IF they think that's a good idea.
Make a new Freighter-DCU with 70-80% resist on structure for the pilots who are willing to trade some cargocapacity for a tank.

---

Some of you is vaguely aware that using any weapon/offensive module on a capital in high sec is an exploit, and that if reported will get a warning to the offender and the capship will be moved in low sec?

---

Damage controls are hardly offensive modules.
And the freighter don't seem to be a 100% pure cap-ship since it lacks the ability to cynojump.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 18/08/2007 19:55:15

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Originally by: Dylatar

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Athren Soulsteal

---

So far the only argument aganst low slots is "nooo then some on can bring a cap into high sec..." And? What the prob, so now they can do what with it, protect the miners from the nasty rats? (in high sec). Oh they can use it to gank at the gates.. sure lets build a cap to throw it away at a gate. OH maybe they are going to use it for mining,,,

---

There are tons of other arguments in this thread, but that one is as good as any. The problem with capitals in high sec is that they're not supposed to be there. Hence, they can't jump there. If a freighter was to be given low slots it could take a cap into a place where it isn't supposed to be, thus circumventing an intended game mechanic.

---

Not an argument. Stated often in this thread but simply corrected by just increasing size of repackaged capital ships. And on the other hand: expanders reduce hull hp, which again makes a freigher more vulnerable and slower as it already is. Nobody who wants to prevent that would do this. And in my own opinion not necessary. Most time I haven't loaded my freighter full up to the rooftop. That makes cargo expanders the very last thing I would fit to a freighter.

---

Decrease the cargosize of freighters and give them enough lowslots to fully compensate that loss with cargoexpanders IF they think that's a good idea.
Make a new Freighter-DCU with 70-80% resist on structure for the pilots who are willing to trade some cargocapacity for a tank.

---

Some of you is vaguely aware that using any weapon/offensive module on a capital in high sec is an exploit, and that if reported will get a warning to the offender and the capship will be moved in low sec?

---

Damage controls are hardly offensive modules.
And the freighter don't seem to be a 100% pure cap-ship since it lacks the ability to cynojump.

---

As the "fear" was for freighter to brig capship in high sec to wreack havoc, and that was used as a reason not to give low slots to freighters, I was pointing that a capship can't operate in high sec.

---

Originally by: Cpt Fina

---

Decrease the cargosize of freighters and give them enough lowslots to fully compensate that loss with cargoexpanders

---