a 10 vs 1 where the 1 is an freighter, it will never win as it can’t attack back.
so god knows where you think I said a freighter will win against a fleet?!?
all I’ve said is that the gankers should have to work for this kill, sure it’ll mean they have to use ammo and spend the time to kill it.
the only way a freighter could possibly win in a 10 vs 1, is if it can out tank the attackers long enough for a friendly fleet to jump in to rescue it, or CONCORD shows up. other than that the gankers will win in the end. the only other way the gankers would lose is if the freighter manages to warp out of the gank.
so where do I say above in all my posted did I say that a freighter could win against gankers?
They do have to work for it. Are you ever going to provide anything to justify your assertion that they need to work harder, or are you just going to keep repeating it over and over again?
And, again, I would like to note your dishonesty in making this thread. You claimed to be interested in customization, now it is revealed that the thing you really care about is nerfing suicide ganking.
all I hear is a ganker that is scared that freighters and jump freighters were to get rigslots added in they might have to deal with a few more EHP to get an kill.
I see no reason why added another level of ship customization requires a reason other than more fitting options and an more enjoyable play for freighter players, with a possible increase of survival chance.
Nope. That’s not how it works. You want a change, you get to justify that change. You don’t get to come up with an idea and then demand that everyone prove it wrong.
I see no reason why added another level of ship customization requires a reason other than more fitting options and an more enjoyable play for freighter players, with a possible increase of survival chance.
Stop lying. This is not about customization, it’s about nerfing suicide ganking. If you got rig slots at the expense of a base HP nerf such that HP rigs can only bring you up to where you are now you would consider that unacceptable.
No it wasn’t. Customization was just the dishonest pretense you came up with to lobby for your suicide ganking nerf. It is very obvious that the only “customization” you care about is getting a HP buff.
sadly @Merin_Ryskin has turned it into an ganking topic.
but what do expect from gankers!?!
Hint for the clueless: I don’t do suicide ganking.
Amazingly people are complex and can have more than one motivation simultaneously.
Can you honestly say that fitting & flying a hauler is not boring.
And can you honestly say that “needing” an alt to web your freighter is compelling game play.
We want hauling to be potentially exciting gameplay, and giving them real fittings including weapons is one way to approach that problem, as there is nothing exciting about being a pinata for the first person who wants to shoot you.
Consider the following.
Treat Freighters as a low agility high mass battleship, with say… 2 less turret/missile slots on average. In terms of slots, pg, cpu etc. (Heck, even make it use Battleship skill, that way industrial pilots actually get combat hulls also)
Then increase the gank timer. Yes, increase. This makes it more possible to gank solo if you pick the right target, it gives actually realistic time to fight back, and it means piloting skill matters more which reduces the horrific multiboxing a dozen ships at once gameplay because you can’t effectively pilot that many at once.
That’s nice. I’ll still continue to respond to your pathetic begging for PvP nerfs and point out your dishonesty.
Some people can. I see no evidence that the OP had any motivation besides “nerf PvP”. The only part of their proposal they could come up with any justification at all for was the part about giving a HP buff against suicide ganking, and once the discussion converged on that point they immediately went to openly arguing that suicide ganking needs to be nerfed.
Can you honestly say that fitting & flying a hauler is not boring.
Nope. But nothing about the OP’s proposal fixes this in any way. Having another slot to buff either cargo or HP while leaving the game experience untouched is not fixing anything about it being boring. It’s just a buff to make freighters more powerful.
Then increase the gank timer.
Be careful what you wish for. A longer timer and more complex freighters might make freighter ganks more interesting but it would also make it immensely easier and cheaper to gank other targets. I suspect there are a lot of highsec combat PvE players that would be extremely unhappy about the increase in loss rates you want to inflict on them.
oh there are other topics about adding high and midslots.
personally think that would completely change the role of these ships.
RIG’s with current lowslots would mean only really worth installing are your armour, shield, engineering and astro rigs, and those tend to have drawbacks on speed, HP, signature and cargo capacity.
but knowing the EVE community, you’re right their will be those that want be happy with a minor addition of rigs.
adding midslots would make a massive change, as those modules require a much higher CPU and Power grid just to mount the passive modules, and active ones require a higher CAP than the freighters currently have.
once midslots or highslots are added it’ll require a complete redesign of the freighters. and that’d take ages to get agreement on the final product.
Adding rigs doesn’t somehow make it engaging and there really isn’t a way to make hauling engaging. It just is a boring move x from point a to point b exercise.
In the last 7 years hauling I’ve religiously used a webbing alt daily and weekly (me as this character provides webs). Not once have I been bumped or targetted by gankers. After 7 years, that’s thousands of trips between trade hubs in highsec, to and between regional hubs in highsec, delivering into low, null and wh space.
It’s possible that I’ve never needed a webber at all, just as most people transport safely through highsec without a webber, because needing a webber isn’t a thing. That’s one of many approaches to controlling risk. Ganking isn’t anywhere near the problem it’s made out to be on the forum though.
Oh, I’m aware.
You obviously would need to make a similar adjustment to all the Industrials since they are balanced around the current timer.
But for the Combat ships. Semi shrug.
I think EVE could do better in general for large ship vs small ship combat, but a longer gank timer wouldn’t actually impact a lot of the classic gank ships in the same way, since say… a mission battleships drones would clear glass cannon catalysts pretty fast.
What it would do I feel is
A: Make people feel they had a chance to shoot back & maybe win more often.
B: Make it less obvious what the perfect gank ships are because things like tank would start to come into play as desirable also.
C: Like you said, it would spread ganking more evenly between combat & industrial players which would lighten the pressure on industrialists who currently are pure targets.
Yip since coming back in 2018 I’ve been attacked a number of times by gate campers and random gankers, and only ship I’ve lost to them was on day one when I was moving an APOC from an old station to an new one, and it was mainly due to not knowing about RIG’s and Deadspace modules. Basically a under fitted ship, didn’t bitch about it, talked to the ganker got information that I need to know, and went on with the game.
Since then, haven’t lost a transporter or freighter to a gankers, they have tried, and at best got into hull on a blockade runner in lowsec.
so have nothing against gankers that attack targets, but gankers that attack noobes in starter ships that’s a different story and most ganker m8 I know agree that’s just poor players after easy kills.