Yeah, this.
Freighters are surely for high volume stuff…that is why they have lots of volume. And clearly for some items they are unavoidable to use. My point is, why shove 1bn worth of low volume stuff in there as well…I mean stuff like implants, clone tags ( my speciality ), scripts, yada, yada…if all that stuff would nicely fit into a fast align Gnosis ( mine has align time of 2.5 seconds ). Why take more risk than you need to ?
I pointed out a gank of one such case not long ago, where the person had 3bn of cargo and 1bn of it was all very low volume stuff.
Because it fits and its going to the same destination and the route is via high sec systems
1 Like
It would be quicker to just say ‘haulers are lazy’.
Because they’re so efficient at generating revenue, that they’re essentially the most demanded items in the game, which should realistically carry a premium. In pretty much any game, the most sought-after items will have the biggest price tags attached to them. It simply makes sense. The price reduction is built into these items by default.
Additionally, when you account for inflation, both freighters and exhumers are considerably cheaper than they were throughout EVE’s history, especially considering that both of these ship types had much weaker defenses in the past.
2 Likes
Thats just wrong. But even if it wasnt why should that be punished? There will always be one form that is the most effecient form of revenue btw.
There is much more to say, for example activities that generate ISK out of thin air should probably be less effecient at generating revenue versus activities that involve trade between players that does not generate ISK out of thin air. Do you know what i mean? Probably not. Im out
so neutral logi getting a suspect timer is meaningless?
so what? setting up bookmarks on a belt is a one time operation. if you have to setup more bookmarks to account for the shape of the belt then so be it. it’s cheaper to spend 10 minutes in a 50MN Punisher burning tacs than it is to replace your exhhumer. better yet, once you’ve got those bookmarks, they’re always useful in that belt (anomalies are a different matter)
if you’re mining in a Hulk without a solid defence fleet available, you’re doing it wrong. speaking as an occasional ganker, if I see Hulks on d-scan, I’m getting the catalysts ready. If I see procurers or skiffs, I’m looking for an easier target or just doing what I need to do and forgetting about a miner gank. Hulks in hisec are lossmails-in-waiting.
1 Like
Who said anything about punishment? Freighter and exhumer pilots are enjoying unprecedented levels of affordability for their favorite hulls, on top of massive improvements to their resilience and fitting versatility. If your argument that repeated, significant improvements to efficiency over the years constitute a punishment, well, that’s just being intellectually dishonest.
Okay bye.
2 Likes
He or she is just making things up. Bye
Well you can’t have it both ways. Good on you for never getting ganked…but that surely demonstrates that it can be done and is not some pipe dream impossibility.
Surely it is thus up to players to learn how to do that. You have your method. I have mine. Both no doubt learned from experience and from looking at examples of how not to do it. So…why would we want to make things easier than we ourselves had it ? Let the noobs learn the way we had to. That learning process is vital in Eve.
I dont enjoy avoiding being ganked in high sec and the feeling of not being safe in high sec does not belong either.
See ya!
I think you have just solved the problem in the Red Sea. Just reduce the price of the ships so getting ganked has less of an impact.
2 Likes
Oh come on now. I positively enjoy the risk in Eve. Highsec, in particular, would be mind numbingly BORING without that risk. You go on about ganking putting players off…but far more players would be put off by a totally boring highsec in which they could just load up 20bn worth of stuff and go watch the enirety of War & Peace and leave their ship on autopilot for hours on end. What would even be the point of ‘playing’ a game where one could spend hours not even looking at the screen ? Is that truly ‘playing the game’ ???
Why not just skip logging in altogether and ask CCP if they can just shove 20bn ISK a month into your account and you can watch it pile up ?
2 Likes
If I owned CCP/EVE, I would spin off a new server and implement every single change asked for by carebears (naturally, it would be a PvE-only server). I’m morbidly curious how that would look like.
The starkest contrast I’ve ever seen between these two design methodologies was in a popular survival game called H1Z1. Newer survival titles are pretty bad too in this regard, but not as bad as what I experienced then. Anyway, the PvP servers were pretty much normal, with your standard survival gameplay fueled by resource scarcity. The PvE servers, on the other hand, had a bunch of people running around with thousands of rounds of ammunition calling each other various racist and sexist slurs, and player bases were so prevalent that every inch of claimable land was covered with them, to the extent that the entire 64km² map looked like one giant Brazilian favela.
I imagine a carebear version of EVE would be kind of like that, with everyone flying the biggest, most expensive ships, and hundreds of player stations would litter the overview in every system. The only “currency” would probably be relatively rare high-end officer modules.
It would be glorious.
2 Likes
The bears would then get bored and go ruin another game.
But, judging by Final Fantasy 14s popularity, I guess that what they really want to do, is just run around in bunny girl costumes.
1 Like
Would you gank a retriever with cat ears? What if it sent out an audible uwu when you lock target?
I think this could be an effective anti-gank cosmetic upgrade. Just thinking outside the box.
3 Likes
Since the ISD team has recently purchased a moderation permit, we have removed some off-topic, inappropriate and spam postings. 
14 Likes
Serenity? 
Truly a survival horror experience.
1 Like
Corrected
1 Like