EVE Search - [Issue] Allow rigged ships to go in cargo

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] Allow rigged ships to go in cargo

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.29 00:10:00 - [1] Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 00:11:57 This is not a huge issue but one that has bugged me for ages. All too often I find myself wanting to move stations for one reason or another but it is made much more difficult because a majority of my ships have rigs on them. As such they cannot be put into the cargo of my freighter. Instead I have to move them one at a time. Moving just 5 ships a mere 10 jumps means a total trip of 90 jumps to move the lot (and all too often I want to go further). I am guessing there is some issue on what happens if such ships drop after getting blown up. I really do not know. Certainly I have seen no game balance reasons on why this should not be allowed and just seems needlessly tedious. Heck, with my rigged ships all in cargo I become a more attractive target to gankers giving them a shot at the loot. When I move them one at a time none of the ships are worth a second glance (they are in travel mode for speed and cheaply fitted). Even if the mechanism to allow such a thing does not exist today I would like CCP to tell us if they do not bother for some game balance reason or why it would be too difficult to implement if they have no intention of bringing it in game (presumably they could make it a unique form of packaging so they cannot be sold on market and such). -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.29 00:10:00 - [2] Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 00:11:57 This is not a huge issue but one that has bugged me for ages. All too often I find myself wanting to move stations for one reason or another but it is made much more difficult because a majority of my ships have rigs on them. As such they cannot be put into the cargo of my freighter. Instead I have to move them one at a time. Moving just 5 ships a mere 10 jumps means a total trip of 90 jumps to move the lot (and all too often I want to go further). I am guessing there is some issue on what happens if such ships drop after getting blown up. I really do not know. Certainly I have seen no game balance reasons on why this should not be allowed and just seems needlessly tedious. Heck, with my rigged ships all in cargo I become a more attractive target to gankers giving them a shot at the loot. When I move them one at a time none of the ships are worth a second glance (they are in travel mode for speed and cheaply fitted). Even if the mechanism to allow such a thing does not exist today I would like CCP to tell us if they do not bother for some game balance reason or why it would be too difficult to implement if they have no intention of bringing it in game (presumably they could make it a unique form of packaging so they cannot be sold on market and such). -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.29 00:20:00 - [3] Oh my god I wish! Speaking as a founder member of "rigged ships anonymous" (I have about 50 that I have to manually move every time we move base) I'd dearly love this to happen somehow. Fingers crossed somebody comes up with a good proposal to make this possible that we can take to CCP CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.29 01:02:00 - [4] The most obvious fix to this is either a non-capital ship with a corp hangar, or the ability to put unpackaged ships into a cargo bay(at their full size, of course). The latter is more appealing to me, but the former could be a perfectly valid role for either existing freighters or the proposed mini-freighters. That said, I'll agree that this is one that needs addressing. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.29 01:37:00 - [5] Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 01:36:41 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto The most obvious fix to this is either a non-capital ship with a corp hangar, or the ability to put unpackaged ships into a cargo bay(at their full size, of course). The latter is more appealing to me, but the former could be a perfectly valid role for either existing freighters or the proposed mini-freighters. That said, I'll agree that this is one that needs addressing. Well...unpackaged you could not move more than one Abaddon or Hyperion at a time in which case it is not terribly useful. It would be nice if you could cram in at least three of the largest battleships on any freighter (trained to L4). Of course in packaged mode you could carry a lot more than three. But maybe moving rigged ships should have a drawback. I don't see why a drawback would be necessary but if people think it must then ok. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.29 02:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 01:36:41 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto The most obvious fix to this is either a non-capital ship with a corp hangar, or the ability to put unpackaged ships into a cargo bay(at their full size, of course). The latter is more appealing to me, but the former could be a perfectly valid role for either existing freighters or the proposed mini-freighters. That said, I'll agree that this is one that needs addressing. Well...unpackaged you could not move more than one Abaddon or Hyperion at a time in which case it is not terribly useful. It would be nice if you could cram in at least three of the largest battleships on any freighter (trained to L4). Of course in packaged mode you could carry a lot more than three. But maybe moving rigged ships should have a drawback. I don't see why a drawback would be necessary but if people think it must then ok. Some battleships can be crammed in in pairs, and for the solo ones you get one battleship and a pile of lighter stuff. Either way, it'd speed it up a decent amount, depending on the shape of your hangar. It certainly wouldn't hurt. And if that's a killer issue, then perhaps drop the unpackaged size on some ships, to make it work more effectively. The fundamental barrier here is that CCP won't allow anything that can carry a capital ship into high-sec. This puts a pretty firm upper limit on the size of what you can play with(i.e., no mega-freighters can exist unless capital sizes are increased dramatically), and cuts off a lot of otherwise attractive options. The ones I mentioned above are what I think we're left with. Packaged ships have to lose their rigs, since everything is identical once packaged(for market purposes), which limits you to moving the ships unpackaged. That means either you bring corporate hangar bays to high-sec, or you let unpackaged ships be placed in cargo. At the moment, I default to the one that doesn't require a new freighter class, since the "next freighter" niche is so overpopulated already. It's not perfect, but it's what I think we're left with. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.29 02:24:00 - [7] Why not just have a different packaging mode? Instead of "Repackage" you make it "Transport Package" (I'm sure someone can come up with something more snappy). The Transport Package is (say) 5x the size of a fully packaged item. It cannot be stacked and cannot go on market. However it retains its rigs ( although mods pop off and cargo empties). Tint the pic some color (maybe black and white) to identify it as Transport Packaged. This would be untradeable and unsellable. Reassemble as you would any ship. With the above you could move a max of three battleships at once and have cargo left over (for smaller ships or whatever). -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.29 02:54:00 - [8] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 02:28:52 Why not just have a different packaging mode? Instead of "Repackage" you make it "Transport Package" (I'm sure someone can come up with something more snappy). The Transport Package is (say) 5x the size of a fully packaged item. It cannot be stacked and cannot go on market. However it retains its rigs ( although mods pop off and cargo empties). Tint the pic some color (maybe black and white) to identify it as Transport Packaged. This would be untradeable and unsellable. Reassemble as you would any ship. With the above you could move a max of three battleships at once and have cargo left over (for smaller ships or whatever). Frankly I'd rather they repackage all the way down to normal packaged items size-wise. The only issue I see is if CCP felt they must allow cargo scanning to reveal the ship as rigged in the cargo. That may over complicate it. That could work, but it's too complex to be a really good solution IMO. I'm still leaning towards being able to put unpackaged ships in cargo - it deals with the problem somewhat, it's just good sense(Why is that number for unpackaged size even there if it's not useful? Yes, I know it matters in some POS/corp hangar situations, but still), and it doesn't add unnecessary complexity. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.05.29 03:06:00 - [9] God, yes!!!! PLEASE. This would be a win/win for everyone. Suicide gankers, industrialists.......everyone. Very best regards and thanks to the OP, Windjammer
Katini Ellegahn Capital Development and Security Industries	Posted - 2008.05.29 04:45:00 - [10] Just a reminder to those above me, and those posting after me; Check the "Support this topic" checkbox if you do indeed support the topic. We have no way of knowing how CCP or the CSM members will use the information at a glance - so please make it worth your time and check the appropriate boxes. I also Support this idea.
Vlad Cetes Crimson-Jihad Critical Dissent	Posted - 2008.05.29 06:38:00 - [11] Transport packagin as posted above seems a great idea for the problem. I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.
Exodus Alpha	Posted - 2008.05.29 09:54:00 - [12]
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.05.29 09:59:00 - [13] I support this. Perhaps boosting the transport ships so the transport skill increases the amount of corp hangar size. While essentially removing the cargo bay size. So cargo expanders aren't as valuable. This could do quite a few things. 1. Mini-freighter; 200,000m3 space or so; without the 4 billion isk pricetag. 2. Allow easier moving of rigged ships across empire. 3. Suicide ganking defense; suicide gankers will have to take a risk. 4. Giving an actual reason to train transport ships skill beyond 1. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?"
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.05.29 10:37:00 - [14] I wish to apply support to this issue. I too have rigged and/or insured ships I'd like to be able to rebase, using highsec. Whilst having removable rigs go part way to do this, I don't think that's a desirable solution. And not just because I like being able to keep ships and fits together. Carriers in part, are able to do this, but not nearly to the full extent that I would like. As I see it, I can see as possibilities: Transport case: Take a 'secure can' of some form. Turn it into a ship maintenance bay, and corp hangar array, of 'about' a size to fit a ship in. Perhaps sized, so you get 'battleship sized' on down? (I'd like to be able to fit frigates in a normal hauler again too). Each having a small ish, 'corp hangar' style bay (assuming that's possible given current mechanics, as ownership of can isn't as straight forward as ownership in a carrier) ideally too, for the 'spares' that tend to go with a ship bundle. Actually, I think it'd be nice to make them anchorable too, to act as 'supply points' in 0.0, and places to stash/swap/fit a couple of ship, that are probable, shootable, but not quite as intensive as a POS. Transport ship: Converted Freighter, that's basically a carrier style cargo bay, ship maintenance bay, and corp hangar. But without a jump drive, fighters, logistics ability or indeed slots at all. I don't know what would be a good sizing for this. Personally I don't think 'about the same' as you could currently fit in a freighter (e.g. 20 battleships ish) would be too much a problem, given it would be seriously limited in 'normal' hauling capacity terms. Ship maintenance bay conversion module/rig: Converts cargohold to Ship maintenance bay. Given relative difference between sizes though of packaged vs. unpackaged, it might have to be at a bit of a size skew. (Especially if this is module based, and therefore trades off against cargo expansion - an expanded up hauler can multiply it's size by 5 without too much difficulty) Perhaps as a specialist role for deep space transports? I believe a DST can fit a packaged battleship at the moment, if you go for full expansion capacity. So ... giving them a capability to transport an assembled one, doesn't seem too far beyond the realms of 'reasonable'. Especially if it's also at a similar 'cost' in terms of speed/maneuverability that expanders and rigs apply. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Ethaet Aliastra	Posted - 2008.05.29 10:37:00 - [15] Allow assembled ships to be put in freighters. -------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. There you go. Now that wasn't so hard
Sir Substance	Posted - 2008.05.29 10:56:00 - [16] well, i think rigs are meant to be kinda like boosters. they give you that edge, but they need drawbacks as well. that said, i was very surprised to find that you couldn't put an unpackaged ship in a freighter.
Serenity Steele Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information	Posted - 2008.05.29 11:01:00 - [17] Originally by: Vlad Cetes Transport packagin as posted above seems a great idea for the problem. Post 6: Transport Packaging GMV too. Other Benefits Would also solve the problem of using a generic (aka. Stackable) item type. However I think the size should remain the same as the unpackaged ship - consider it like a plastic-foil wrapper around an assembled ship that is being transported. Related Considerations Would require that freighters accepted "Transport Packages" as well as freight containers. May mix the roles of carriers and jump freighters, as people would simply use jump freighters instead. In this case, the packages should not be possible to jettison, otherwise it will totally be carrier-like. What will happen to the transport packaging if the carrying ship is destroyed? . Will it be ejected into space, or simply destroyed? If ejected into space, then as a completed ship? If simply destroyed, is this a fail-proof way to move ships around NOT using carriers? Anyone know if when a carrier is destroyed, if ships in it's hangar appear in space, or are they automatically destroyed? ≡v≡ Strategic Maps now in Eve-Online Store - Includes Black Rise & Empyrean Age
Riho Mercenary Forces Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.29 11:23:00 - [18] i have alot of ships i need to move if i change base and all of them have rigs. i have freighter but i cant use it. even tho my ship could fit in the hold the game doesnt let it... thats really annoying :( hope this gets adressed soon :) ---------------------------------- Yes... this is my main. Extreme Troll Slayer...
Ming Mongol Cerebellum Enterprises	Posted - 2008.05.29 12:26:00 - [19] Needs addressing, definitely
Sunwillow Auryn	Posted - 2008.05.29 12:32:00 - [20] As noted above the 'next Freighter' slot is heavily congested, but hey, look at how many different types of trucks there are on the roads and you understand why the specialist way is sometimes the only way ;) Similar to a car transporter on the roads, have a freighter that could only carry ships (either packaged or unpackaged).
Mr Toril Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2008.05.29 14:17:00 - [21] Great idea
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.29 15:18:00 - [22] Originally by: James Lyrus Perhaps as a specialist role for deep space transports? I believe a DST can fit a packaged battleship at the moment, if you go for full expansion capacity. So ... giving them a capability to transport an assembled one, doesn't seem too far beyond the realms of 'reasonable'. Especially if it's also at a similar 'cost' in terms of speed/maneuverability that expanders and rigs apply. A DST cannot move a packaged battleship. The very, very best cargo a hauler class can get is a bit over 52,000 m3 and I am pretty sure that requires GSC and T2 cargo rigs to achieve. Without GSC and no T2 cargo rigs they cannot manage 50,000 m3 cargo which is one packaged battleship. Note that some here would be happy with allowing an unpackaged battleship in cargo. While an improvement over today you could not get one in a Jump Freighter. I think whatever solution occurs you should be able to squeeze at least one battleship into a JF (which would allow at least three battleships in a standard freighter).
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.29 16:35:00 - [23] Originally by: Serenity Steele Originally by: Vlad Cetes Transport packagin as posted above seems a great idea for the problem. Post 6: Transport Packaging GMV too. Other Benefits Would also solve the problem of using a generic (aka. Stackable) item type. However I think the size should remain the same as the unpackaged ship - consider it like a plastic-foil wrapper around an assembled ship that is being transported. Related Considerations Would require that freighters accepted "Transport Packages" as well as freight containers. May mix the roles of carriers and jump freighters, as people would simply use jump freighters instead. In this case, the packages should not be possible to jettison, otherwise it will totally be carrier-like. What will happen to the transport packaging if the carrying ship is destroyed? . Will it be ejected into space, or simply destroyed? If ejected into space, then as a completed ship? If simply destroyed, is this a fail-proof way to move ships around NOT using carriers? Anyone know if when a carrier is destroyed, if ships in it's hangar appear in space, or are they automatically destroyed? If it's the same size as the unpacked ship, then why are you bothering with the bubble wrap mechanic at all? Just assume your longshoremen know how to fit it in there without breaking anything. If the mechanic doesn't add anything, then don't add the mechanic - just let people put unpacked ships in cargo. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.05.29 18:51:00 - [24]
Khwalik Ghetto Kings	Posted - 2008.05.29 19:04:00 - [25] supported
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2008.05.29 20:02:00 - [26]
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.05.29 22:06:00 - [27] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: James Lyrus Perhaps as a specialist role for deep space transports? I believe a DST can fit a packaged battleship at the moment, if you go for full expansion capacity. So ... giving them a capability to transport an assembled one, doesn't seem too far beyond the realms of 'reasonable'. Especially if it's also at a similar 'cost' in terms of speed/maneuverability that expanders and rigs apply. A DST cannot move a packaged battleship. The very, very best cargo a hauler class can get is a bit over 52,000 m3 and I am pretty sure that requires GSC and T2 cargo rigs to achieve. Without GSC and no T2 cargo rigs they cannot manage 50,000 m3 cargo which is one packaged battleship. Note that some here would be happy with allowing an unpackaged battleship in cargo. While an improvement over today you could not get one in a Jump Freighter. I think whatever solution occurs you should be able to squeeze at least one battleship into a JF (which would allow at least three battleships in a standard freighter). Ah good point. I thought they were smaller than that for some reason. Sure enough, a Scorpion packaged is 50,000m3. As best I can tell, you can just about do 41800k m3 in a hauler (ironically, the Iteron 5 overtakes DSTs due to 3 rig slots). So at the moment the only way to move a battleship, be it packed or unpacked is a freighter (or carrier). -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Tessen Stellar Tide	Posted - 2008.05.29 22:29:00 - [28]
JafoPBCFR	Posted - 2008.05.29 22:48:00 - [29] Well one thing you can make it is. Half the repakage value and not allow the cargo or fittings be allowed on the ship transported. And if its a real issue maybe have the ship thats transported have a time to be packed and unpacked. Possably even a fee to do so. Also make it transportable by only frighters. This way your keeping your rig and able to transport it.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.05.30 00:55:00 - [30] Originally by: Serenity Steele Related Considerations Would require that freighters accepted "Transport Packages" as well as freight containers. May mix the roles of carriers and jump freighters, as people would simply use jump freighters instead. In this case, the packages should not be possible to jettison, otherwise it will totally be carrier-like. What will happen to the transport packaging if the carrying ship is destroyed? . Will it be ejected into space, or simply destroyed? If ejected into space, then as a completed ship? If simply destroyed, is this a fail-proof way to move ships around NOT using carriers? 1) I do not see why that would be a problem technically or an issue game wise but of course I have no idea what would be technically easy for CCP to implement. Clearly the game already does checks on what is or is not ok to go in a cargo hold even if it would technically fit. 2) Freighters cannot jettison anything already. Further, the ships in a transport package could not have modules installed or cargo in the bay. I forget what ships in a carrier can carry these days (just ammo?). Certainly though a freighter must deliver the cargo to a station or POS that can handle them to be reassembled and fitted. More to the point though is carriers cannot move ships through hi sec. I do not know how many battleships a carrier can drag around but a Jump Freighter as proposed above could only carry one. Not sure that it steps on the carrier's toes and besides, even if they could move similar amounts of rigged ships which would you rather be jumping around no-sec in? 3) I honestly do not know the answer to this question. IIRC CCP made it so all loot from a freighter dropped in one giant can since people could crash a node if it spewed out thousands of items upon destruction. However I do not know if ships in a freighter's hold go in the can or pop into space. I see no reason why they should not go in the can though since they are unusable anyway till re-assembled. The bigger question I suppose is for haulers that get popped carrying smaller ships in this fashion. If the ship is bigger than a jet can what happens? A simple solution to me would be to make cans that drop from ships (or at least haulers) hold 45,000 m3 of stuff so whatever single item even the most pimped hauler could carry would fit into a can. Note I do not mean to change regular jet cans on this. Just the loot drop cans (and make them so nothing can be put into them manually which I think it already the case but not sure). -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Frug Repo Industries R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2008.06.01 07:26:00 - [31] yeah - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Natalya RUS	Posted - 2008.06.01 12:06:00 - [32]
NereSky Trinity Nova Trinity Nova Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.01 12:21:00 - [33] Agreed
Efa Morgan	Posted - 2008.06.02 16:59:00 - [34]
Takimi Star	Posted - 2008.06.04 23:51:00 - [35] oh my god /agree/agree/agree/agree
Voculus E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.06.05 08:00:00 - [36] BTW Jade, we don't need to come up with a proposal to take to CCP. This thread is it. They can either let us do it, or not. There's no need to devise any kind of scheme or RP story for it. _________________________________________________________
Brmble GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.05 09:26:00 - [37] yes plz ~ no not believin in urself ~
Unreal5 Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2008.06.05 09:49:00 - [38] yes ASD
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.06.05 09:59:00 - [39] Oh, yeah. Both "transport packaging" or just allowing assembled ships in cargo (although being able to carry for instance only one Hyperion is a pain) are both valid, but some way of moving rigged ships short of having someone fly them or stick them in a carrier would be very nice. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Dinique The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.06.05 10:23:00 - [40] Assembled ships into freighters - yes please! _____ The species has amused itself to death
Dray Spartan Industries Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2008.06.05 10:32:00 - [41] Edited by: Dray on 05/06/2008 10:32:57 Give freighters a slot, hi, mid, low, dosen't matter and allow it to fit 1 type of module only, that module in effect making the freighter hold a ship maintenance bay. Say it only allows you to transport ships and nothing else, or something along those lines.
Dariah Stardweller	Posted - 2008.06.05 10:48:00 - [42] /signed
Lo3d3R MAFIA Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.06.05 11:06:00 - [43] yes! rigged ships should be able to be repackaged without destroying the rigs, I'm sure a 'sensible' EVE-explanation can be found for these changes. ___________________ Sexy Time:
Oniko Sengir The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.06.08 10:04:00 - [44] Transport packages sounds like a good solution. Latest Video
Che Biko	Posted - 2008.06.08 13:53:00 - [45]
Hockenbary Amarr Tactical Recon	Posted - 2008.06.08 21:34:00 - [46]
Locin WeEda Red Frog Investments Blue Sky Consortium	Posted - 2008.06.16 09:13:00 - [47] I support this. It should be noted that it is possible to transport rigged ships in a freighter if their unpackaged volume is 120,000 m3 or below with current game mechanics. Just send it as a courier package. I would however like to be able to transport rigged ships with a volume higher than 120,000 m3 as well. Red Frog Freight Service
Zaran Darkstar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.06.16 23:09:00 - [48] Good idea :-)
marie blueprint	Posted - 2008.06.16 23:45:00 - [49] Edited by: marie blueprint on 16/06/2008 23:45:16 yes
Orb Lati ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.17 01:14:00 - [50] I feel this is a un-needed request and personally do not support it. If you want to move ships in mass use a carrier or suck it up and repackage them (lossing the rigs). "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.04 16:56:00 - [51] Not sure what happened to this proposal but since we didn't get to discuss it in Iceland I think it definitely needs to be on the agenda for the next meeting. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Blade Slinger	Posted - 2008.07.04 18:15:00 - [52] Good idea.
XoPhyte Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.04 18:47:00 - [53] Agreed. I never understood why you built ships (non packaged) into freightors, and I don't see any downside to it.
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:18:00 - [54] Will be raising this on sunday 13th. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Pwett QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:32:00 - [55] Edited by: Pwett on 10/07/2008 16:32:58 When you do - we need a 'tug' class ship. Why worry about cargo when you can just push the things through space. The amount of mass you can move could be dependant on skill level where each level is equivalent about 100,000,000 kg or, roughly, one average BS. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
Bryg Philomena Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.11 15:52:00 - [56] Especially now with faction warfare, this would be an amazing feature. I currently have an absolution sitting in highsec, amd -9.0 to amarr, am in faction warfare, and have a -4 sec status. I cannot even get this ship to lowsec to be moved by carrier. I would love CCP if they allowed this, you dont need to repackage them, just make them movable. If you add a ship maint hanger to a freighter, it would not encroach on carriers jobs as they would be impracticle to use them in combat or anywhere other than highsec. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Am I reading this correctly? You claim you have a bug that undresses female avatars??? Your signature
Itanis Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.07.11 21:47:00 - [57] Even though you can courier-pack anything smaller than a BS for transport in a freighter, and you can use a carrier otherwise, some definite strong support.
SeptimusCurtius Tacitus	Posted - 2008.07.11 23:00:00 - [58] Definitely allow freighters to carry unpacked ships or transport wrap them. Simple restrictions of nothing in the cargo bay at all (to stop them being used as super freighter - itty 5 with full cargo times ?). Only can be taken out at a station, though should appear as loot in a destroyed freighter (recoverable by another freighter) just to make things more interesting and risky (read only used by the stupid or desperate in low/no sec so as not to tread on a carriers toes)
Ichiro Itaki Rage For Order	Posted - 2008.07.12 00:00:00 - [59] Originally by: Pwett Edited by: Pwett on 10/07/2008 16:32:58 When you do - we need a 'tug' class ship. Why worry about cargo when you can just push the things through space. The amount of mass you can move could be dependant on skill level where each level is equivalent about 100,000,000 kg or, roughly, one average BS. I can see some inherent problems, such as: 1. How do you get all your ships out into space? How do you get them back into a station? Would you just undock each ship, leave the ship, dock back up, get the next ship, etc then finally undock with the Tug and lock up each ship and have some sort of tractor module? And what would prevent people from jumping in your ship while you are getting them all out of the station? 2. Jumping through stargates. How exactly would that work? Part of the whole idea of ships is that it is in fact enclosed. The stuff around you does not follow you to the next system. How do you jump 20 ships and a tug at one time? Kind of defies logic, too. But who's to say what's logical, what with oil instead of outerspace. I support a ship that can ONLY carry ships. It's "cargo" is huge-- millions of m3, but it can only hold unpackaged ships. It does not require any removal of mods, but cargo can only have ammo (to keep from carrying a bunch of extra crap, as you can imagine) Put a cap on ship size-- nothing larger than a BS. When the Ship Transport blows, the ships just pop up in space, fully assembled, fully fitted (if you choose) just floating. Some may blow up with the transport, some may suffer damage and others will be unscathed. This puts not only a huge risk on transporting, but also allows a whole new mechanic. Imagine the loot you could score. However, these ships should definitely not be easy to kill (as in, no suicide high sec ganking) ♠
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.22 15:04:00 - [60] Raised the issue and it was supported by the CSM. I think our best idea was probably some kind of variety Freight Container that mimics the performance of a ship maintenance bay on a cap ship. ie allows assembled fits inside but no cargo. You'd then load these "transit freight" containers into the freighter and bingo. Anyway, we'll be adding it to the formal agenda for the discussions with CCP and fingers crossed. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2008.07.22 15:47:00 - [61] CCP needs to introduce a new storage container specifically designed to carry assembled ships. Ship Transportation Can. 120k m/3, and can carry a fully assempled ship. Assembled ships should maintain the same 'volume' as they do when packaged, but can only be transported using a Transport Can (i.e. with a freighter). The can has the same limitations as a carrier: Only ammo/drones can be in the cargo of the ship being transported.
Atlanticpyro The Space BorderLine Diabolic Paradox	Posted - 2008.07.22 19:02:00 - [62]
Lucai Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.07.23 09:48:00 - [63]
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.23 10:04:00 - [64] I support this :) Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Drykor Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.07.23 12:18:00 - [65] I'd love to be able to move rigged ships in some way. The issue isn't so much with battleships, I can understand if they are too big to fit more than 1 in a freighter, but for all the small stuff that would be safe to move solo anyway, I don't see a reason not to allow it.
Siona Windweaver	Posted - 2008.07.23 12:44:00 - [66]
Dsnakes Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.07.23 13:21:00 - [67] /Signed
Blazing Fire Interstellar Operations Incorporated	Posted - 2008.07.23 14:18:00 - [68] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/05/2008 02:28:52 Why not just have a different packaging mode? Instead of "Repackage" you make it "Transport Package" (I'm sure someone can come up with something more snappy). The Transport Package is (say) 5x the size of a fully packaged item. It cannot be stacked and cannot go on market. However it retains its rigs ( although mods pop off and cargo empties). Tint the pic some color (maybe black and white) to identify it as Transport Packaged. This would be untradeable and unsellable. Reassemble as you would any ship. With the above you could move a max of three battleships at once and have cargo left over (for smaller ships or whatever). Frankly I'd rather they repackage all the way down to normal packaged items size-wise. The only issue I see is if CCP felt they must allow cargo scanning to reveal the ship as rigged in the cargo. That may over complicate it. This. Blazing Fire CEO Interstellar Operations Incorporated Corp web site Services [Service] Killboard hosting [Service] Forum hosting [Service] Web site hosting [Service] Alliance Creation
Ackuula	Posted - 2008.07.26 15:11:00 - [69] /agree
Ackuula	Posted - 2008.07.26 15:14:00 - [70] /agreed
Apple Boy Wyverns of Dionysus Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.07.27 15:51:00 - [71]
Lep Erd Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.07 04:30:00 - [72] Edited by: Lep Erd on 07/08/2008 04:30:13 My preference is for a freighter-type ship (i.e, no fitting slots) that is nothing but hangar and a small cargo bay. Make it gate friendly... no drones, so it's harmless. And people will have the option to transport ships as their desire with little fuss. And there's already a system in place for dealing with carriers that pop with ships aboard. For bonus points... make it an InterBus ship. :)
Myrhial Arkenath Ghost Festival	Posted - 2008.08.07 07:14:00 - [73] Do want Diary of a pod pilot
Apos Masamo	Posted - 2008.08.09 09:46:00 - [74] ehhhhmmm YES!!!!!!!!!!
Solcypher The Priory	Posted - 2008.10.03 16:07:00 - [75] Op is very much /signed
Another Forum'Alt	Posted - 2008.10.03 19:46:00 - [76] DO WANT. This is not part of my sig. ...Or is it?
Irida Mershkov War is Bliss	Posted - 2008.10.03 22:40:00 - [77] Want!
Drake Draconis	Posted - 2008.10.04 17:08:00 - [78] /me signed
Rayne Jameson	Posted - 2008.11.21 18:15:00 - [79] YES!!!11 i support!
Saralle Zhukov Win Tech	Posted - 2008.11.21 18:29:00 - [80] I don't understand CCP's view on this. Used to be able to put fully fitted out ships in carriers with their cargo in them. CCP made a change and still not sure why they did it. Just seemed designed to give pilots a headache. So sure this has my support. Kill them all God will know his own.
Synth Klabs	Posted - 2009.01.12 20:50:00 - [81]
chatgris	Posted - 2009.01.12 22:28:00 - [82]
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.01.12 22:32:00 - [83] Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 12/01/2009 22:31:51 I do not support this idea. I think it's one of the logical limitations. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.01.12 23:21:00 - [84] They do exist ingame. You can already put rigged ships into your cargo.
Synth Klabs	Posted - 2009.01.12 23:28:00 - [85] Originally by: Jason Edwards They do exist ingame. You can already put rigged ships into your cargo. need confirm on this...anyone can?
Axel Vindislaga	Posted - 2009.01.24 10:56:00 - [86] Perhaps you could mount a new kind of module that converts the cargo hold for various tasks... I have always thought that the cargo hold should suffer a capacity hit if used for mining except in mining dedicated vessels to represent equipment used Inside the cargo hold that organises the carious minerals being harvested. This same idea could be used here. You mount a special module to your freighter (freighter only modules (as I assume there is some reason freighters cannot mount modules)) or huge industrial that allows the transport of assembled ships both rigged and standard at the loss of total capacity. Once there are people having private Ambulation parties in cargo holds people are going to care what is in them.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:02:00 - [87] Originally by: Synth Klabs Originally by: Jason Edwards They do exist ingame. You can already put rigged ships into your cargo. need confirm on this...anyone can? Here is my iteron 5 carrying a nemesis that's assembled and named Papermache. The method too which you go about doing it is obvious enough. Even though it is fairly difficult in a roundabout way also. Assembled ship in cargo ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
TimGascoigne The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.01.25 23:55:00 - [88] This will definitely allow people to freely move to new areas of operations. Otherwise you have to manually fly every ship and there is no need for this. Also you could purchase a fitted ship from contracts and then set up a Courier contract and have your hot out of the oven - fully fitted new ship delivered straight to your door

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.