|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Mainreh Rhonaki
Jazz Associates
R i s e
   |
Posted - 2007.06.12 11:43:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Mainreh Rhonaki on 12/06/2007 11:43:22
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Sorting, trading, contracting, packaging, canning is already more than half the time of a logistics carrier run. Now you want to add even more time to that tedious burden?
Disallowing cans in haulers in carriers serves no practical purpose whatsoever. Its impact on gameplay can hardly be considered an improvement for anyone.
Cans are primarily an organizational tool for the carrier. A typical logistics carrier run will transport stuff for _at least_ half a dozen ppl. My personal record is 11, but I doubt that is anywhere near a global record. Each of these ppl will typically want at least a full fitting sent, often several. The book keeping needed to do such a haul will be monstrous if you cannot bundle stuff.
Have the relevant designers and devs missed the dozens of threads pleading for container BPs so stuff can be sorted in outpost hangars? What purpose did those pleas have if not to get some tools to create order in the materialistic chaos that is Eve. Cans fill the same purpose for carriers.
The practical upshot of this change is that carriers will still operate as logistics vessels, but that you need to do tons more bookkeeping as a part of the operation. For a medium sized alliance living in the outer parts of null-sec the carrier is the only relevant method of getting replacement equipment out. Reducing the total amount transferred by some 10-15% will not affect this state of affairs.
Carrier haulage is _necessary_ for many null-sec alliances. The poor pilots that provide this service will have to continue doing it, because the alternative will be to move closer to empire space where industrial and freighter transport is feasible alternatives. They will just have a lot less fun.
CCP:
1) Revert this change.
2) Provide a clear description of the percieved problem.
|
Mainreh Rhonaki
Jazz Associates
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 13:03:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Nesa
Forget cans, basically means that now the maximum courier mission I can jump for a corp-mate is 10,000m3... down from 38,000m3 :( So much for being able to just get people to make me a courier mission :(
You had to go find a way to make me even more depressed. Half my corp hangar is usually fuel and ozone. So for me, it's down to about 4k m3 :(
|
Mainreh Rhonaki
Jazz Associates
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 10:27:00 -
[3]
I'm really disappointed that this thread has not received an official follow-up. It has to be one of the more unanimous threads posted in this forum, yet there has not been an response to it after Oneiromancer's original replies.
This original response displayed a limited understanding of the way carriers are used by small and medium-sized alliances. Indeed, claiming that "And may I point out that 'carrier' does NOT refer to the ship's capacity of hauling?" is just stupid. The carrier is clearly a logistics vessel. Logistics is about _efficiently_ transporting resources. The change in question reduces the efficiency within its declared role.
I understand that disallowing cans inside a hauler inside a carrier is a fix for an exploit. I know at least one exploit that will be fixed by this.
Either:
a) it may be that fixing this or some other exploit is important enough that this _major nerf_* should be accepted as a side-effect.
or,
b) the change in question is considered to be a desired result.
It is not too late for damage control in this issue. I accept a "After revelations release, plz." Just declaring a) or b) (as listed above) would be a major improvement.
For me, the developer misconduct issue is a fairly minor one. However, when a significant subset of your community protests a change and there is no reply whatsoever to that protest, Your Silence perfectly strikes Trust, wrecking for major damage.
* see: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=534527&page=6#157 for detailed explanation of how this is a nerf.
|
Mainreh Rhonaki
Jazz Associates
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.07.04 21:44:00 -
[4]
We languish in this thread with no CCP response. Bump for continued perseverance.
|
Mainreh Rhonaki
Jazz Associates
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.07.07 07:40:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Mainreh Rhonaki on 07/07/2007 07:41:00
Originally by: Karlemgne
Excuse me, there is a capital class transport ship. Its called a Freighter. I'm confused as to why exactly these big 0.0 alliances need to be able to transport stuff too and from 0.0 with very little appreciable risk.
Then perhaps you should clear that confusion before joining the debate.
Secondly, carrier logistics is not inherently safe. The main reason why not many carriers are lost there, is because no one has bothered to do enough surveillance work to catch one at a bad time. Carriers will now and then get bumped out of hiway POSes and can be manually bumped at its endpoint stations.
To answer your question: A medium-sized alliance will require several runs per week, or the waiting for replacement equipment will take too long. If you can gather a fleet of thirty defenders for a 70 jump escort 3-4 days a week, you are lucky. It would not be feasible for our alliance.
|
|
|
| |
|