EVE Search - Disallow freighters from high sec Discussion

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Disallow freighters from high sec Discussion

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.05.18 22:45:00 - [151] Quite a few ppl are missing the point of this thread here. Logistics are an important target in warfare. The fact that alliance/corp haulers can become invulnerable while hiding in npc corps to avoid war decs, especially if the changes to concord that are on the test server are brought to tq. The newfound invulnerability of freighters would harm the game a lot more than removing freighters from >0.5 would. I myself would rather see that npc corp characters could not undock in any ship that cannot be flown with a trial accound would be a lot better a solution, since it would force those corp hopping eeksploiters to corporations that can be wardecd or at least force them to buy logistics from third party logistics corporations. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 22:45:00 - [152] Originally by: Setana Manoro Really ? How many posts in this thread are made by Ki Ann and how many are by others ? Must i read every post in this thread and waste hs of my life to show you how you flamed most of the guys that posted ?; or should I just move along and realize that you are here just to "make a flaming". I will take the latter anyday. Granted you use a neutral tone, but you do not talk to anyone, as evidence by the way you are posting. You may count, or I can do it for you. Don't see the point in counting though. The replies I have made in this thread has been limited to a few posts answering to constructive remarks, and trying to propel the discussion forward, and numerous posts to defend myself against outright flames, or to point out that I am quite sincere in my OP. Would you rather I lay down and accept when someone is trying to ridicule me or walk all over me? I'm sure you would, but I'm not built that way. Fact is, if it weren't for people like you, doing your upmost to flame or ridicule me or my intentions in the first place, I would stand for very few posts in this thread. The fact that you now berate me for defending myself only leads to me taking up even more space. /Ki Joy to the world Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Setana Manoro Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.18 22:54:00 - [153] Well, if they could make it that you would need 40-50 BS's to take down a freighter, instead of the 15 needed now, then i would be very happy because that is a balance. Such an investment would be of around 600m ISK and you would still have a chance at making a profit. Moving them to low-sec is not an option though because not just alliances have NPC corp chars with freighters. A buddy of mine uses his to trade between major hubs. Another friend uses it to move ore and minerals. I used it to move faction mods and BS's untill i made each racial BS to level 3 and also got one just for transporting mods. A guy in my corp uses it to move minerals to a T1/T2 production place in high-sec. Neither of these examples are of people using the freighter as part of a large corp, and for these people - except me because i sold mine, the "freighters restricted to low-sec or 0.0" is pretty much death. The OP fails to see this and concentrates on how overpowered freighters are. Well, how underpowered are they now when they are killed so easily ? -------------------------------------------------- http://dojo.fi/~rancid/loituma__.swfAlways look on the bright side
Nim9i5	Posted - 2007.05.18 23:21:00 - [154] This OP is a troll, doesn't think through his reasoning, he just says no frieghters in high sec. This game will just be a time sink if so for the builders. How will you get bs in empire? ROFL move all the mins with haulers. Fighting as well is for 0.0, not empire. There is supposedly suppose to be pirating in low sec, not high sec. I see no problem with moving a bunch of mods and etc. with a freighter that you trained for. Who needs a frieghter in low sec anyways when you have carriers, besides pos of course. If you really wanna fix easy supply lines to deep space, make carriers have alot smaller of a cargo bay.
ElweSingollo Starlancers Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2007.05.18 23:32:00 - [155] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Vana Gank You are adressing the wrong problem with the wrong solution Sorry - I just have to say it, you are entitled to that opinion (and your own PR show) - but what the hell are you trying to solve? Hi-Sec ganking of Freighters? It's been discussed in the other thread, you've even been there. And even tough not many of you bother to read all posts, instead reading just the op - let me try to repeat the arguments here. The problem isnt that Freighters "Pop left & right" because they are allowed in there They "pop left and right" because the whole "Drone weapon delivery" is not jammed by CONCORDE. Again (sorry, repeating for the lazy ppl): CONCORDE JAM the Turret's (Ships is just a platform for the turrets) CONCORDE doesnt JAM (and hence disable) Drones. Hence CONCORDE must learn how to DISABLE the weapon-delivery, and not the weapon-platform. Because Drones are Damage-by-proxy and can sustain for long after the "Mothership" has been disabled. No, I think it is you that is having trouble understanding this. The problem is that Freighters being invulnerable in high sec (which is the outcome of the changes on SiSi, and the changes you suggest) is imbalancing, and equally imbalancing is that they have no protective measures. Thus there is no way to keep the issue balanced, and thus they should be restricted to "unsafe space" only. There they are balanced. In high sec they are not, and will never be balanced. /Ki Hokay ignorng the fact that there are a lot of NPC frieghter flyers who are "invulnerable" except to suicide ganks and even then those very ones are now vulnerable to that I am pretty damn sure my alts freighter can get shot up pay 2mil (for a corp) 50mil (for an allaince) war dec and hey guess what you too can shoot up my alt's freighter when it is space. I have the choice to undock or not with that freighter same as I have the choice of whether or not to undock my Abaddon and attempt to blow you up so please tell me how thats invulnerable? CCP and Eve Online... It's not a bug, it's a feature
ElweSingollo Starlancers Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2007.05.18 23:37:00 - [156] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Qui Shon I'm still fairly new, but does anyone know how many 130-150 million (Cargo rigs and expanders)Iteron V's it would take to keep up with Jita 4-4 commerce for just one saturday? I.e think it's laggy now... Or how about the number of Itty V's to move the ore or even minerals to produce, say, 10% of the ships sold in any bigger region? And then transport those ships & other goods to various market hubs. A max skill Charon has some 980k m3 of space, right? A 140mil Itty V has 38k m3 of space. So to substitute one freighter, you need 25 rigged Itty V's. Or 20 if you use GSC's in the Itty, but not in the freighter. So you want to increase the effort of moving stuff at least 20 fold. Like I said, I don't have a great deal of experience in this game, nor do I know the one day gross m3 of Jita 4-4 or smaller local hubs. I would still claim, however out of place it is for a relative noob to say so, that disallowing freighters from high-sec is not a completely ridiculous idea only if the general plan and motive is to get rid of highsec alltogether, or at least greatly reduce it. Or to put it another way. Do you want to either pay 10-20 times the price, or travel 10-20 times the jumps to purchase the ship or module you need? In case your aim is to force low sec market hubs to take the place of high sec ones, I highly doubt that would ever happen, given the number of people who prefer highsec. Why does all trade have to go to Jita? I believe freighters are a big part of the Jita problem, and reading replies like yours strenghtens that belief. /Ki Do you recall Yulai when it wass a trade hub possibly not given the age of your character It was comparitavely given the servrer population then busier then Jita is now and guess what that was without the aid of Freighters. CCP and Eve Online... It's not a bug, it's a feature
Riddick Valer	Posted - 2007.05.18 23:42:00 - [157] Even if we assume that removing freighters from hi-sec will magically make market hubs go to low-sec, there are some major problems. 1) No one would fly freighters anymore. They'd just use carriers for their transportation needs. 2) Its a bit harder to gank carriers, but if they starts working too well, start expecting to see motherships used as big cargo ships.
Le Skunk Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.19 04:58:00 - [158] Edited by: Le Skunk on 19/05/2007 04:56:30 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 18/05/2007 11:51:31 No. I do not agree to disallowing freighters from high secs because we crafters would have a hard time hauling minerals to make ships, etc. If you think it is easy, you can obviously try hauling millions of tritanium from A to B over 20 jumps to get away from laaaaaaaaaag city. Then try doing that for 5 journeys. I am thinking of asking CCP to give us some kind of computer hauling service to do boring long haul watching the paint dry up and I think that would be a better way. Gank free and you can have your freighters in low secs for all I care. LOL i like the way you are only 'thinking' about 'asking' someone who wont listen to you and you wont get. ~Does it trouble you during long momebnts on the toilet? SKUNK
MissileRus	Posted - 2007.05.19 05:44:00 - [159] i see no reason why they should deny freighters in high-sec all of the sudden... whats the point again? just make concorde jam drones and get back to fixing real stuff instead of making ultra radical changes to the core of the game, i want eve to last for many years to come tbh.. --------------------------- 4. i like pizza
R3dSh1ft FIRMA	Posted - 2007.05.19 08:57:00 - [160] The problem is not with freighters. The problem is with Drone boats. Now drone boats have been fixed on SISI (drones are jammed), it is now only possible to suicide gank something using a high-damage alpha set of Battleships, which is just like it should be. Freighters can still be suicide ganked, using Tech1 Ravens with siege launchers. Instead of taking 15 Dominixes, it will take roughly (average dmg. of 550 per torp, 6 torps per volley = 3300 dmg. per raven., freighter has roughly 150k HPS, so you need 45 Ravens to gank a freighter in high-sec) 45 insured battleships. So it is only worth killing the freighter if its really packed (I've seen freighters with in excess of 10b in t2 mods before, just need to be a bit smarter about finding these ones) 45 * 40 = approx 2billion isk. Also, if its worth it to you to kill a particular player, you can blow them up anyway. If high-sec freighters didn't exist it would be necessary to invent them. I understand your reasoning behind this however this isn't an issue about invulnerability, its about the discontinuity of risk vs. reward in high-low-zero sec. More value needs to be put into lowsec to make it worthwhile for a 0.4 only freighter. _________________________________________________________ FIRMA - a drinking corp with an EVE problem
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 09:10:00 - [161] It would be disastrous to New Eden economy if Freighters were banned from empire. To solve the situation fix the imbalance that only allows the ganking to be done by only one ship the Dominix. Concord hopefully will get the upgrade soon and the problem will be mostly solved. (Note if a ship somewhere between a transport and a freighter were introduced then you might could ban Freighters without destroying the game income) Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Skraeling Shortbus Caldari Gallente Federal Bank FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.19 09:49:00 - [162] freighters not in highsec = freighters being pointless. why bother with them anymore yea they can move a lot of stuff that is great and all but slow cumbersome stupid "wannabe" capital ships just dont cut it in lowsec or lower.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.05.19 09:52:00 - [163] Originally by: R3dSh1ft So it is only worth killing the freighter if its really packed (I've seen freighters with in excess of 10b in t2 mods before, just need to be a bit smarter about finding these ones) 45 * 40 = approx 2billion isk. Also, if its worth it to you to kill a particular player, you can blow them up anyway. So nobody will bother with it. Thats what Ki An means when he says they have just been made invulnerable. I would be very surprised to hear of ANY more freighter attacks once the SiSi patch comes to TQ. Different players have different feelings about this, but thats going to be the outcome. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune
Fayn Trak Gallente Myridian Trading Systems	Posted - 2007.05.19 09:54:00 - [164] I;ve read the first two pages and will continue on shortly, initial thought; Freighters are only invulnerable in high sec aslong as they're in npc corporations, instead of limiting them by sec status limit them by corporate status. A herd of cattle A flock of geese A lot of isk remember when sigs were text?
Ti Chi Minmatar flaming logistics	Posted - 2007.05.19 11:37:00 - [165] As a freighter pilot, my freighter hardly enters empire. But when it does, I expect to have a degree of safety that any other ship does. So if I'm not wardec'ed I should be completely protected by concord. So if you wanted to distrupt my trade route wardec me and my corp/allaince, so we can deffend ourselves, like any other attempt to attack on a corp's assets, within empire. If it is impossible with in the game mechanics to stop the drones from attacking, allow concord to remote rep the attacked ship, problem solved. So if you want to attack freighters wardec, wardec, and wardec. Its a simple and fair solution.
Katana Sengoku Minmatar The Knights Templar Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.19 12:10:00 - [166] The only ones here dumb enough to agree with Ki An are his alts.
WarMongeer	Posted - 2007.05.19 12:17:00 - [167] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Selena 001 Originally by: Ki An But, I have tested it. I tested with 15 hyperions (blaster damage), all with maxed skills and faction mods. Best I could find. They might have been able to take down a freighter in the 15 second window you have in a .5 system before you are jammed by Concord. The total cost of these 15 faction fitted and fully T2 rigged hyperions, flown by maxed out pilots stood a chance to pull it off. See if you can calculate how much that attempt would cost on Tranquility. /Ki Ok... have you tried testing it OUT of stupid mode? Faction fitted Hyperions? lol... certainly what I expect to see on a gank squad.... not. I'm more than confident that 50 T1 caracals could do the job, unfortunatly, I dont have 49 more accounts, or the will to waste an hour of other peoples lives testing it out. If you insist I'll do some math and see if its possible... Please do that math, because I would love to see that. I'm gonna do it too, and we can compare results later on. /Ki TBH any gank with hyperion's will fail, the dude was right, that's a ****ty ship to try on this particular scenario no matter how you fit it.
General Apocalypse Amarr Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:09:00 - [168] Here's one for you if i build a outpost egg somewhere and whant to transport it to it's destination WTF am i gonna do if the route 40 \0/ is trough empire ? Huh ? Shell we go 100 jumps or more trought 0.0 ? And if you whant to gank something gangk the stupid low sec courier macros i passesd some time ago whit a 2 BC trough Tash and we saw like 30 haules . To bad we coudn't tank the sentry or we woud have won the Top Grifer award . Just my 20c Thank You SkyFlyer
Chia Mulholland Mulholland Enterprises	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:50:00 - [169] The problem as I see it is two-fold: - gankers circumvent CONCORD by attacking with drones - freighter pilots circumvent war decs by staying in newb corps Fix CONCORDs problem with drones and at the same time prohibit people from staying in newb corps. The latter could be by not giving you more SP after you reach a certain level of SP or by not allowing you to train BS/BC level skills while in a newb corp. And of course, once you leave the newb corp, you can't come back.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2007.05.19 18:08:00 - [170] "So nobody will bother with it. Thats what Ki An means when he says they have just been made invulnerable. " And that is really how it should be. There really is no problem with suicide ganking being made virtually impossible. Suicide ganking was just a exploit of the game mechanic, where you used many ships to out dps a ships tank before concord nailed you. CCP only left it there because they new how much coding work it would take to correct it with out essentially flagged all people as pvp immune in empire. suicide ganking is an exploit to game mechancis to allow people to circumvent normal ISK making activities in the correct places. If you want to pirate you need to be playing the game where people can fight back without suiciding themselves...
Barbarellas Daughter Lonely Barbarella	Posted - 2007.05.19 18:42:00 - [171] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 "So nobody will bother with it. Thats what Ki An means when he says they have just been made invulnerable. " And that is really how it should be. There really is no problem with suicide ganking being made virtually impossible. Suicide ganking was just a exploit of the game mechanic, where you used many ships to out dps a ships tank before concord nailed you. CCP only left it there because they new how much coding work it would take to correct it with out essentially flagged all people as pvp immune in empire. suicide ganking is an exploit to game mechancis to allow people to circumvent normal ISK making activities in the correct places. If you want to pirate you need to be playing the game where people can fight back without suiciding themselves... To OP: Lets start slowly: Forbid freighters in 1.0. This will remove some pressure from some popular trade hub
Creed Richards Minmatar Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.19 19:44:00 - [172] Edited by: Creed Richards on 19/05/2007 19:47:08 The only thing that I agree with the OP (after reading the first two pages, sorry, I don't have time to read the rest) is the invulnerable freighters would add to the Jita problem. But his plan simply cannot fly. Perhaps the changes he speaks of in SiSi are unbalanced too much in the carebear side, but suicide ganking is not balanced at all either, in fact, it's borderline exploiting IMHO. One counter is no insurance for concord kills, seems a lot more balanced to me (as far as suicide ganking goes) Freighters simply make what was completely boring (large, long range hauling) more tolerable. They should not be restricted in any manner. But CCP must take other means to diversify the markets.
insanebe Caldari G.H.O.S.T	Posted - 2007.05.19 19:50:00 - [173] most freighter pilots exploit a loop hole in empire war decs by moving their alts into the undeclarable noob corps, this frustrates the pvpers/war fighters whatever you want to call them so much they gank freighters, solution stop noob corps flying freighters, someone in a noob corp has no business flying something that takes like a year to train for, suddenly all these suicide gangks will disappear knowledge is power.... guard it well
Jaffa Agonar Minmatar Mithril Inc	Posted - 2007.05.19 20:03:00 - [174] Edited by: Jaffa Agonar on 19/05/2007 20:01:20 Originally by: insanebe solution stop noob corps flying freighters, someone in a noob corp has no business flying something that takes like a year to train for, suddenly all these suicide gangks will disappear Not that it really matters for this given discussion, but freighters take around 1 month to train for. Getting up to Freighter V takes 92 days total, starting at Industrial 0 (give or take, depending on your learning levels).
Godar Marak Amarr Return Of Red Dawn	Posted - 2007.05.19 21:32:00 - [175] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 18/05/2007 11:51:31 No. I do not agree to disallowing freighters from high secs because we crafters would have a hard time hauling minerals to make ships, etc. There is no such thing as crafting in EVE. Go back to wow. -------------------- '\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/' Cant we all just get along?
Thesas Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2007.05.20 02:18:00 - [176] Invulnerable is not the definition of costly. Consult your dictionary. Hypothetical question, If you have 1 billion to 3 billion isk to spend, and you wish to kill a freighter in Empire, how would you do it? If you mount an effort to kill an Empire freighter, you should be concerned about the potential cost verses reward, just as the freighter pilot is when he undocks.
Tenebrion Darkness	Posted - 2007.05.20 03:48:00 - [177] The simplest and least controversial, as far as I can tell, towards the "noob corp" freighters, would be to allow for personal war decs, ie only towards one person, no matter what corp they're in. This would eliminate the whole argument of invulnerability of pilots in "noob corps" on many levels and not just the freighter pilots. It would either have to be a limited number of personal decs or a skill introduced that allowed you to train for them (to simulate the subtlety of arranging for a personal dec and not a corporate one). I always see all these posts about either limiting the piloting abilities of "noob corp" members, or kicking them out all together. I myself have been working for Viziam awhile now, not because I'm exploiting by corp jumping, or hiding, it's just that I haven't found the right corp/philosophy that I wish to get behind. To try and tell me that bc of my choice to work for an npc corp I can't fly certain class ships is ridiculous. And for those saying make it like a trial account, they can't train/fly certain things bc they haven't paid for the game. I am however willing to compromise, and have some sort of deccing system, where those willing to spend the cash to hunt one person, can go right ahead.
Thesas Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2007.05.20 04:14:00 - [178] I would suggest that before you start imposing restrictions on noobs, it would be prudent to look at the statistics on EveÆs actual membership base. CCP has goals for this game I am sure. I do not know what those goals may be, but I suspect growth and player satisfaction are notable variables within those goals. One simple fact which is true in all mmoÆs is that forum participants are a vocal minority of any player base. CCP has the true picture that none of us may see in that they have access to player statistics. They know what every percentage of the players prefer in game play. There is always a vision in every game by the creators but that vision must also factor in the reality of what players actually do with their games. There is a tendency to want to herd noobs into roles which mature players want them to occupy. Best consider what the noobs think about that for they pay to play as well and opinions expressed in these forums are hardly representative of the many. There are simply too many alternatives to being told what one can and can not do and the status quo worked for current players to date. Do you expect new players to accept less?
Jmanis Catharg Caldari Dusk Blade	Posted - 2007.05.20 04:26:00 - [179] Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 20/05/2007 04:25:53 Here's the simplest solution in my books. Just make it so you cant fly a freighter unless you are part of a player-run corp. That way anyone who wants to target hi sec freighters can do so through the use of wardecs, and completely bypasses the issue of how to make hi sec freighters which cant be wardecced safe. Quote: I would suggest that before you start imposing restrictions on noobs, Since when do noobs fly freighters?
Tortun Nahme	Posted - 2007.05.20 05:23:00 - [180] Edited by: Tortun Nahme on 20/05/2007 05:21:46 Ok, now just to be clear I'm going to recap this thread as I understand it... It has become significantly more difficult to pirate independant freighters in Empire space, where piracy is illegal and is patrolled against by concord. Some people seem to find this unsatisfactory because these kills they have to deal with the consequences of said action. Some desire these freighters to be restricted from high security systems so they might still profit from their destruction. The high sec freighters can still be destroyed if they belong to a war dec'd corp which makes them a legitimate target. The justification for the proposed ban is that they are classed as capitol ships due to (essentially) size. The detractors of the plan to ban freighters from high sec site the impact on the usability of freighters and the economic impact. Now first off, what could possibly inspire an empire, or even concord, to EVER even consider restricting a vital economic factor from controlled space? I mean, it plain makes no sense from a politicol or economic standpoint. In the simulated dynamic universe they are just as dependant on a strong economy as the players. Banning combat capitol ships on the other hand makes perfect sense in that they are a significant threat to security, but if these freighters were so much easier to kill before concord got "tough" on the pirates why would they be remotely inclined to restrict them? Also sited was how the game worked perfectly well before freighters were brought in. Well that can be said for alot of factors. Heck you might as well eliminate capitol ships entirely since they aren't "necessary" and the game worked well, and in some peoples opinions BETTER without them... Concord was introduced to "protect" empire space, so how can a fix intended to make them effective at doing just that be considered an imbalance. It was correcting a flaw or oversight that was being "exploited" before hand. That also kind of shoots down the argument about how "its not how the game was meant to be played" Some suggest "restricting" the use of the vessel to players within non-npc corps. For starters, a player who leaves a player run corp automatically ends UP in an npc corp, does their vessel simply become unusable? for that matter how do the developers justify "cutting off" a portion of their playerbase from something they have worked hard and shelled out time and isk to use. A freighter is already restricted to players who have taken the time to learn the skills, had the isk to purchase it, and felt it was a worthwhile investment. In what way is it balanced to suddenly take that priviledge away? For that matter, with nothing short of pos' really being restricted to player run corps what are the odds ccp would even consider such an idea, realistically speaking? For that matter, considering the sheer number of npc corps and the amount of people in them, is restricting them simply for their choice of corp or the fact that they havent found one they are comfortable in even remotely reasonable or fair? The only real question that comes to mind is "How does conrcord doing their job become unbalanced when it is working as advertised?" You want to gank freighters in high sec, it will be costly. Not impossible. Some people want to hide in npc corps to escape war decs, well so what? theres plenty of honest players left you can pick a fair fight with, or is a fair fight not fair enough for you? edit:some grammar and spelling, meh to the rest of it

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.