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

I suppose there’s a second option: completely change the map to make most highsec into lowsec or NPC nullsec, break up all large highsec regions such that any hauling trip outside the local area requires leaving highsec for at least some of the route, and remove jump freighters entirely. CONCORD stays, but it is effectively taken out of the picture by moving all of the relevant activity into places where CONCORD doesn’t exist.

1 Like

Significantly increasing the concord timer achieves the same goal without needing removal.

And, as I have already explained, it causes massive problems elsewhere. All you do is trade a lower rate of freighter ganks for a massive increase in attacks on everything else in highsec, quite possibly to the point where it is impossible to do any meaningful PvE anymore because any combat PvE ship will be promptly destroyed and looted the moment it undocks.

And even in the context of freighter ganking everyone is still probably going to use the same basic tactics, just with slight adjustments to the fit. As long as the end result of an attack is still destruction by CONCORD whether you win or lose anyone with any sense is only going to attack when victory is guaranteed. Making the gank ships fit token T1 basic armor plates or shield extenders is hardly a meaningful change.

1 Like

Yeah… The fact you call having to fit armour plates token…

Of course. If CCP are going to keep running events which buff gankers industrials clearly need a buff even in the current system.

1 Like

What else is it, if not token? It doesn’t require meaningful amounts of ISK because it’s just T1. It doesn’t require skill because plates just sit there adding HP no matter what the player does. All it does is make a slight adjustment to the cost of a gank. It’s an illusion of change, not real change.

Of course. If CCP are going to keep running events which buff gankers industrials clearly need a buff even in the current system.

Alternatively, hauling is already heavily biased in favor of smart haulers and it’s 100% fine if stupid players die at a higher rate during certain events.

1 Like

Yes agree that the HP modifying RIG’s are an issue. But it’s not just the RIGs, it’s also the modules that applies a percentage bonus to HP. Now have no issues with static HP bonuses like armor plates as they add a set amount.

And I did add to the opening post the suggestion of reducing structure HP by 25% or even 33%.
Now i know some will say that isn’t enough, but remember HP RIG’s only increase by a percentage and not a static bonuses.

So Amarr freighter currently with 3× transverse bulkhead II would end up with @195,000 HP (100k + 25% + 25% + 25%)
But even with a 25% reduced Structure HP with the same setup would end up with @149,000 HP.
That’s almost a 50k decrease.

Armor and Shield i would leave as if is, as these aren’t massive, most of freighter’s EHP (which everyone focuses on) comes from structural HP.

Ideally the HP RIGs (and really also to low/midslot modules) should have the same stacking penalties as resistance RIGs and Modules. So the more you you add the less benefit you gain, but the negatives effects still stack with full effect.

The addition of stacking penalties to the HP modifying RIGs and modules would stop the massive HP tanking we see in some ship fits. At most you’d see 4× bulkhead (rig and lowslot combos) as anything beyond that would be more benefit to other things.

This would mean freighter players have to make choice of HP bonus to Structure, increase resistances or some other fit.
Some might try for the faster warp option with a reduced armor HP and add a single anti-EM shield RIG to help counter the reduced EHP effect of the lower hull and armor HP

I have to give this suggestion a -1. Well, a +1 for trying to bring freighters in line with the perception of what all ships “should” have, but -1 for inadvertently trying to make things more difficult (since ccp would nerf freighter base stats in order to keep them the same overall) and -1 for missing why freighters lost their rig slots in the first place.

As has been mentioned here, freighters did have rig slots at one point. They were removed at the same time they gained low slots with the idea that rigs removed flexible customizability which all ships should have. Now you have the free choice to swap your freighter to be faster, tougher, or to carry more every time you dock for no cost. Previously, that wasn’t an option.

I WANT RIG SLOTS FOR FREIGHTERS,
BECAUSE THEN CCP LOWERS THEIR BASE HP,
AS THEY ALWAYS DO WHEN THEY DO THIS KIND OF STUFF!

THIS IS TOTALLY NOT IN CONTRADICTION TO MY POST IN THE OTHER THREAD,
WHERE I WANT UNGANKABLE FREIGHTERS!

I DON’T KNOW WHY I’M YELLING!

3 Likes

Because you’re Solecist and you do whatever the ■■■■ you want, that’s why.

3 Likes

■■■■ YEAH! :smiley:

1 Like

I feel the need to translate “■■■■ YEAH” into something more meaningful.

The only thing that kept me in check was CCP Falcon.
I honestly wished I could actually talk to him and be friends with him,
but that’s simply not ever going to happen. I just suck at that.

He taught me to have respect for him, for a myriad of reasons,
not only, but also, because he banned me far and wide for literally years.

I also respect him for actually listening to what I had to say. For understanding that my behaviour often had good reasons and that it has an actually intellectual and freedom loving base. I believe he respected my insistence on certain things regarding censorship, free speech and what should and should not actually be policed on a forum. Police behaviour, not words.

He even helped me when he noticed that I’m doing too much.
Gave me a friendly warning. Then I dialed back.

Forum rules definitely changed of the better over the years,
and I like to believe that I had a tiny bit to do with that.

Despite what most people think of him, he was a harsh “ruler”, but also a fair “ruler”. He wasn’t like those trash cans from other forums. Despite most people seeing me as an Anarchist who does not respect rulers, I do respect people who make sure that everyone’s behaviour is in line with what’s good for the whole. That doesn’t make someone a “ruler”, but makes someone a person who cares about things not falling apart.

The forum rules changed for the better, thanks to him. Some might say it’s too much, but that is the consequence of freedom of speech. There aren’t many cases where I actually reported people, but some actually manage to cross even my line.

Now, though, without him, there’s no one left “up there”, who I need to respect.
No offense to CCP Convict and CCP Dopamine, but they’re not CCP Falcon.
I rather have him active here, kicking ass and insulting people for valid reasons.

Sadly there’s also barely any reason anymore to post …
… because, as in every forum open to too many people …
… the intellectuals are a sad minority …

… but still …

… without CCP Falcon …

… the gloves are off.

PS: I miss writing long posts.

2 Likes

I miss Falcon too.

“Show me one person who has been genuinely harmed by AFK cloaking and I’ll show you someone who has no business playing EvE.”

“The solution to suicide ganking isn’t [insert solution de joure here], it’s to bring bigger guns to the fight.”

(Both paraphrases, both from the old forums.)

Mods just don’t talk like that. But Falcon did. He didn’t just enforce the rules, he didn’t suffer idiots to post at length about topics they didn’t understand.

That took guts. Love him or hate him, agree with him or not, you have to give him credit for that.

4 Likes

Exactly! He didn’t take ■■■■ from anyone,
and never was afraid of throwing ■■■■ back when it was the right thing to do.

1 Like

He understood “sandbox”.

I feel like when they caved on the Blackout that was the final straw.

2 Likes