Add RIG slots to Freighters and Jump Freighters, CCP time to add?

**edit: (clarification) 7/2/2020 7:05am

-This topic is NOT an anti-ganking topic, and anyone trying to say it is or tries to change this topic into an Ganking related topic will be reported to mods (this has already been done a couple of times).
-This topic is solely about improving the gameplay of freighters and jump-freighters, nothing more or less. The only reason Armor RIG’s appear first is they are the first you see in the fitting window, thus not the focus of the topic.
-The examples given in the topic use an Amarr freighter, only based on the fact my skills are related to Amarr, not because it’s tanking abilities.
-The goal of this topic is about how limited freighter players are in customization of these two ship classes, and IF YOU READ THE OP PROPERLY you’ll see it talks about a number possible fits.**

Please read with an open mind and remember this isn’t an anti-ganking topic.
edit end:

It’s been years since RIG slots were added, yet freighters and jump freighters are the only ship classes that still haven’t had them added yet, other than one off special ship models.

Isn’t time these were put in?

As we know the rig modules will allow for enhancements for a cost (rig mount points and isk), but they also have a counter to the positive benefits the rig module adds.

And as most know you can’t nullify these negatives, only reduce the effect with skills down to an -5% per RIG module.

If these rig slots were added, it could improve the game experience of flying these ships.
Depending on the rigs installed you can have some good fits, but you’d basically be limited to using Armour, Astronautic, Engineering and Shield RIG’s, and even in these groups there are a number of RIG’s that would be a complete waste of time installing. So anything that repair related would be almost a complete waste of time, a passive shield increase would be questionable as you’d be talking an extra 0.5-1.0 HP/s increase. Engineering RIG’s for CAP is a waste of time looking at, as you have heaps already with what you have. But CPU and Powergrid RIG’s could allow mounting of Civilian Small Armor repair module or Basic Damage Control module installation, and these would be a huge game changer even though they are the weakest modules of their types.


See also: Armor Tanking and Guide to Logistics

The downsides of armor rigs can be mitigated by training Icon skillbook2.png Armor Rigging.

Name Effect Downside
Anti-EM Pump Increase armor resistance to EM damage Decreases ship’s maximum velocity
Anti-Explosive Pump Increase armor resistance to explosive damage Decreases ship’s maximum velocity
Anti-Kinetic Pump Increase armor resistance to kinetic damage Decreases ship’s maximum velocity
Anti-Thermal Pump Increase armor resistance to thermal damage Decreases ship’s maximum velocity
Auxillary Nano Pump Increase amount a local armor repair module repairs per cycle Increases armor repairer powergrid requirements (not recommended unless you can mount an small civ armor repair)
Nanobot Accelerator Decrease local armor repair module cycle time[1] Increases armor repairer powergrid requirements (not recommended unless you can mount an small civ armor repair)
Remote Repair Augmentor Reduces capacitor used by remote armor repair modules Decreases ship’s maximum velocity (not recommended)
Transverse Bulkhead Increases hull hit points by a percentage Decreases ship’s cargo capacity
Trimark Armor Pump Increases armor hit points by a percentage Decreases ship’s maximum velocity
  1. ^ This is not subject to stacking penalties, despite what the rig’s description says.


The downsides of astronautic rigs can be mitigated by training Icon skillbook2.png Astronautics Rigging.

Name Effect Downside
Auxiliary Thruster Increase maximum velocity Decreases armor hit points
Cargohold Optimization Increases cargo capacity[1] Decreases armor hit points
Dynamic Fuel Valve Decreases the capacitor used by afterburners and microwarpdrives not recommended
Engine Thermal Shielding Increases cycle duration of afterburners and microwarpdrives not recommended
Higgs Anchor [2] Increase mass and agility while greatly reducing maximum velocity Reduces warp velocity
Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer Increases maximum warp velocity Increases signature radius
Low Friction Nozzle Joints Increases agility Decreases armor hit points
Polycarbon Engine Housing Increases maximum velocity and agility Decreases armor hit points
Warp Core Optimizer Reduces the capacitor needs for warping Increases signature radius
  1. ^ This only affects the “normal” cargo bay, it doesn’t increase the capacity of any “special” cargo bays (e.g. ore hold, fleet hangar, etc)
  2. ^ Only one Higgs Anchor rig can be fit to a ship at time. Additionally, there is no Tech 2 variant of this rig.


Name Effect Downside
Ancillary Current Router Increases ship’s powergrid No downside
Capacitor Control Circuit Increases ship’s capacitor recharge rate No downside
Command Processor [1] Increase the number of Command Burst modules that can be equipped to a command-capable ship not recommended
Egress Port Maximizer Decreases the capacitor use of capacitor transfer and neutraliser modules not recommended
Liquid Cooled Electronics Reduces the CPU needs of modules that require the Electronics Upgrades[2] skill No downside
Powergrid Subroutine Maximizer Decreases the CPU need for all power upgrade modules[3] No downside
Processor Overclocking Unit Increases ship’s CPU -5% shield recharge rate[4]
Semiconductor Memory Cell Increases ship’s total capacitor No downside
  1. ^ There is no Tech 2 variant of this rig.
  2. ^ This includes modules like Co-Processors and Signal Amplifiers.
  3. ^ All modules which increase a ship’s powergrid, e.g. Micro-Auxiliary Power Cores, Power Diagnostic Systems, and Reactor Control Units.
  4. ^ This penalty cannot be reduced.


See also: Shield Tanking

The downsides of shield rigs can be mitigated by training Icon skillbook2.png Shield Rigging.

Name Effect Downside
Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer Increase shield resistance to EM damage Increases ship’s signature radius
Anti-Explosive Screen Reinforcer Increase shield resistance to explosive damage Increases ship’s signature radius
Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer Increase shield resistance to kinetic damage Increases ship’s signature radius
Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer Increase shield resistance to thermal damage Increases ship’s signature radius
Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard Decreases the capacitor used by modules that require the Shield Operation[1] skill Increases ship’s signature radius*(not recommended)*
Core Defense Charge Economizer Decreases powergrid use of shield upgrade modules Increases ship’s signature radius*(not recommended)*
Core Defense Field Extender Increases shield capacity Increases ship’s signature radius
Core Defense Field Purger Increases shield recharge rate Increases ship’s signature radius
Core Defense Operation Solidifier Decreases the cycle time of shield boosters Increases ship’s signature radius*(not recommended)*
  1. ^ Shield Boosters and Ancilliary Shield Boosters.

As can been seen some much needed improvements with a counter.

Looking to others thoughts and CCP’s input.

note this is to counter ideas like freighters-are-too-cost-effective-to-suicide-gank-need-hp-increase, which is suggesting increase freighters HP by x2, and another topic is suggesting adding med and high slots, both are massively overpowered boosts which would make ganking even harder were the rig option is percentage based.


I’m not suggesting any changes to the low/mid/high slot setup. And highly against adding med and high slots to these ships as this would make too much of a major change and imbalance.

Just adding RIG slots back into complement the existing lowslots and ship bonuses. To add a level of customization to these ships, to improving it’s alignment times, speed to warp, massive increase to cargo capacity, improved EHP and the ability to have EM shield Resistance (which will make some Gankers feel this topic is targeting at them) , this will make the freighters a little harder for the kill if the fit is deserving of the effort, which some I have spoken too believe would be an nice change to the current old tactic of solely EM damage attacks.

But adding RIG’s might make it harder for gankers in some areas in others it’ll make it easier, with shield RIGs, the gankers gain a larger target signature by 10%-5% **per RIG mounted, meaning near instant lock on these large ships. Armor RIG’s do the same to velocity, and Astronautical RIG’s reduces EHP by reducing armor HP. So Gankers don’t lose out on this, if anything they gain some nice bonuses as a byproduct of RIG Drawback effects.
edit end:
Just suggesting;

3 Capital RIG slots with 400.0 fitting points for the freighters
2 Capital RIG slots with 400.0 fitting points for the jump freighters

Edit (8/2/20)
(the fitting points could be reduced to 350 or even 300 for balancing perposes)

And maybe nuff the structure HP by 1/4 (or 1/3a mosts) to counter the affect of the Transverse Bulkhead offer.
Example: Providence 100,000 drop to 75,000 with 3× Transverse Bulkhead II would have 146,484 HP, with T1 versions 129,100, and still has the lose of cargo capacity.
Where currently the above without a reduced HP would get 195,312 HP with T2.

And if stacking penalties were applied as noted, the above amounts would require fitting 3× RIGs and 1-2× lowslot modules, and even with the best skills and modules installed would have at best a -35% to cargo for 3 rigs and 2 of the best lowslot modules.

1 Like

Ew, no


You do understand that when they make these enhancements they nerf the base stats so the end result is basically the same?

-1 Make Work



There’s no reason given for you no.

But there’s heaps of reasons for yes.

I know this, but as noted if you spend the time to get skill level in rigs you reduce the nerf.

And as I see it this is a better solution than some of the other suggestion been thrown around.

Would it be bad for freighters to be 20 slot ships, with a 13 med/low split based on race, and room for 5ish medium or large weapons based on PG/CPU, & 2 utility slots? (Just as example stats).
Would it actually break the game in any way if they had rig slots, could do solid active tank, could prop mod?
I mean, sure, some balance changes would be needed somewhere, but wouldn’t it actually be more interesting for freighter pilots to have a whole lot of different ways to fit their ship which create trade offs.

1 Like

I’m not suggesting any changes to the low/mid/high slot setup.

Just suggesting;

3 Capital RIG slots with 400.0 fitting points for the freighters
2 Capital RIG slots with 400.0 fitting points for the jump freighters

1 Like

But your suggestion has the same reasoning behind it. There’s no more reason to add rigs than any other slots.

In some cases it would be a major pita. For example if they have large slots now they can salvage and use tractor beams? Or does there have to be all sorts of special code?

And for what? In the end once you fit the ship it would be the same. This is just what they did when they added low slots.

To me the whole point of this request is to buff the ships like in the other thread, someone thought the devs are naïve enough to add this stuff without nerfing the base stats.

Should just merge the threads.

1 Like

RIG’s don’t prove as much of an affect as say Shield Boosters, or Afterburners to a Freighter.

With Mid and High slots, you have to completely redesign these ships, increase the CPU, Power Grid and CAP, as you’re allowing for active modules to be installed.

RIG’s are passive modification modules, akin to what the freighters and jump freighters are currently limited to.

The RIG’s allow for more customization of the Freighters?JFs, but at a cost (as listed in OP).

The only players I could see bitching about these ships gaining RIG slots is the Gankers, as if one Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer (30% resist with T1 and 35% with T2, before skill bonuses) were to be installed, it kills the Gankers main damage hope on freighters, and they’ll have to think of other methods to gank freighters faster.

Remember all RIGs add is a % of what is already there, so in somecases like the Core Defense Field Purger, you’d gain possibly 1HP/s extra with max skill bonuses, where a mid-slot booster would provide miles more HP/s.

1 Like

You’re missing the point. The argument for both rigs and other slots is the same: wanting more customization and more power. And you have yet to do anything to establish that freighters need a buff at all.

1 Like

Ok, and how does this break the game?
Sure it’s a change, but is it really a bad change.

I’ve read those other threads, and they talk about massive possible changes.

Just added midslots would require major changes to CPU/Power Grid/CAP on the freighters to just allow the basic medslot modules to be installed.

My suggest has the least effect on the current freight/JF specs. as you know you can’t go overboard with RIG’s, you’re limited by the 400 points of available mount, and then limited by number of RIGSlots (3 for T1 and 2 for T2), and as most know the dream RIG fit is almost impossible because of these limitations.
Then throw in the RIG Drawbacks, -10% average on whatever the effect is.
Providence with a T1 Capital Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer;
30% EM Shield Resistance + skill bonuses, and then you have 11Km signature increased to 12.1Km (with no skills in shield rigging), that’s larger than the Revelation Dreadnought, and even at lvl5 you’ll still have 11.55km signature (still 0.55km larger than the Revelation).

So you’ll still have at worse a 5% drawback for a RIG install.

If it has such a small effect then why do you want to implement this change?

All Freighters and Jump Freighters had rigs slots.

They were removed due to the lack of customisation capability they provide, in favor of the existing lowslot config.

No. Their removal in favour of lowslots is much better.

So massive -1 on this suggestion from me.

Freighters are fine as they are.

My freighters have too much hp anyways.

1 Like

True, but RIG’s would be the lesser of the two evils.

What’s the biggest benefit you gain from RIG’s?

Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer T2
35% for an T2 RIG, vs 30% for T1
Costs 75 vs 50 for the T1
Drawback 10% to signature radius (5% with max skills)

EM Ward Amplifer T2
37.5% for T2 vs 32.5% for T1 (not for forget the faction, officer and Deadspace versions getting upto 43.2%)
Costs 30CPU and 1 Power Grid (no other negative effects or costs, and with skills these are even reduced)
Drawback nil.

So are RIGs so powerful compared to midslot modules?


You only have two options (in some case only 1) of a RIG type, you’re limited by the number you can mount and the cost to of installing.

RIG’s only help improve existing specs and other installed modules, but you can’t completely remove the drawbacks.

So if you decided to armor HP tank you freighter, with 3 Trimark modules you’re default velocity of 70m/s would go crashing down, even with lowslot modules and good skills you’d be an armoured snail.
As an example with my skills I have an @+20% bonus to velocity on ships, with 3 Trimark and lvl5 armor rigging I can only gain +9.4%, that’s an 53% reducing is bonus.
So with max freighter skills and 3 trimarks (with max rig skills) would end up with a 95.725m/s velocity, a 10m/s drop from default velocity with max freighter and nav skills.

Now you would have +20% (for the T2 Trimarks) to armor HP that would add an extra +56% to Armour HP with max skills, but you are talking a hell of a lot of SkillPoints to get those bonuses.
So 46k HP increases to 94.185k and with max armour/rig/freighter skills on an Providence, other freighters will have different figures.

T2 Layered Plating does almost as good as the Trimarks without the Velocity lose, Energized does better (but CPU kills that option)

to counter the requests for midslot additions

But why do we need to counter one pointless request with a different pointless request? The answer is that freighters shouldn’t receive any buff.

1 Like

Freighters are boring, you can’t screw up fitting them, there is almost no customisation.
This isn’t a good thing for the game for ships to be boring.
You can make freighters far more interesting to fly, give them far more things to consider, and make them far more personal since you can fit them.

Note, this is not talking about buff or nerf. They don’t have to end up getting an EHP buff at the end of it, or a nerf.