That’s wrong on at least two levels
interesting analogy.
why would any reasonable person,
bring billions,
to a back-room poker game,
in a sleazy part of town,
with notorously slow security,
to play with known killers ?
it’s not an interesting analogy.
Regardless of where you stand on the gank/no-gank spectrum, OP does have a point (one that’s been brought up before and will no doubt be brought up again).
I think we should allow freighters to be armed.
What with, Arthur? It is the practise of the ganker to bring overwhelming firepower to the operation. Nothing you could arm a freighter with in Highsec would make the slightest difference. Surely?
I used to play a game with a forum category named “equine cemetery” where the mods would consign any “dead horse” posts that certain people couldn’t stop creating new threads about and I feel like you guys could really use one of those.
The point was merely that you could make haulers less “toothless”.
No, no, I got that completely. You could arm Freighters, but CCP would surely reduce their resists as a balancing compromise, and perhaps have to provide compensatory buffs to other vessels or gameplay.
I don’t think it’s as straightforward as you’ve set out.
Allowing (certain) haulers and freighters to at least run an assault damage control would be a step in the right direction. Plus give them a bonus to ADC duration.
This is completely missing the point of the OP.
The issue as he explains it, is the difference in required investment to the reward.
Basically, the risk/reward is skewed in favor of the gankers. What they risk being, the value of their ships - which they already consider as spent ammo.
I’ll reconsider your proposals when you’ve fleshed them out rather than plucked them out (of thin air).
I’m not sure there’s really much point. The subject of freighter ganks has been brought up for the better part of the last decade (if not longer), and the discussion always boils down to “haul less expensive stuff so you don’t get ganked” or “find a different career in EVE”.
I think its a very interesting analogy. In the real world most people in their right minds will not carry a big bag full of money into a seedy bookstore to gamble with thieves and cut-throats.
But Eve is not the real world. It is a managed game world that people pay to participate in.
Part of what makes it a game is that the tables are all (mostly) level and the potential returns are tied to the risk.
Its the opportunity to take real risks in this alternate reality that makes it exciting, that makes the servers worth supporting.
Here is a proposal : ships that have red safety must have a number of “core” in their cargo, purchasable from NPC (10M/core). Each core present allows to deal 1k damage to a target, before concord forcefully shuts down the guns.
This way, to take down a 300k EHP freighter, you need to field 3B + ships cost.
Took this idea from CCP and their structure core.
It’s an analogy. Does not make it interesting.
Can you just hear the Catalyst pilots screaming in agony…?
In space, no one can hear them cry.
(edit : got the quote wrong)
For those of you do not live in the northern hemisphere, ping can be over 300ms and the scan resolution of the ship is largely irrelevant.
Which conveniently ignores the fact that the maller pilot looses exactly the same amount of sec status partaking in a gank of a frieghter as had they blown up a rookie ship. This is where the mechanic is really out of whack. Stealing a penny from the a jar is persecuted very differently to blowing up Prudential Savings and Loan.
Good question. That is why cyno field generators are now limited to a handful of ships as it was ridiculously cheap to use them on low effort rookie ships.
Its still not anywhere near 5 billion and there is no way 6 ships can stop a freighter getting alpha struck by 12 ships.
Please. You do not see the thugs and bullies attacking each other. Blackout proved that after the first week.
Why should you? Talk about entitled.
Agreed.
Not it has not. The maths is already worked out, over time the aggressor always comes out on top in the end. The items plundered pay for the multi boxed gank fleet, the scouts and the thieving hauler alt. If there was a cost it wouldn’t’ be the usual suspects in Udema over and over again.
Exactly how much additional ISK or items does the freighter get for this? What are they going to do, loot the field at 50m/s while a bunch of the gank alts vacuum up the wrecks for the next go? The freighter only stands to loose so its hardly fair bet.
A wrapped battleship does not fit in a a full EHP freighter and the contract system doesn’t let wrapped ships go into the maintenance bay of a bowhead. If it did, this scenario would not be happening and the aggressor would need to bring many more ships to overcome the EHP of a brick tank bowhead.
With a target of that signature size and as scan resolution approaches infinity, it pretty much does.
Which really is the first part where there needs to be a mechanic change, cargo scanning someone should result in a yellow suspect timer.
If only.
People cannot complain about the economy of eve being in a mess without also looking at how these %1 wealth individuals got there.
I have and I did not need to do anything other than get up at 3am while the bot herders were asleep.
I am sure CCP will look at those once they are finished with the new starer packs and pilot services offerings.
Its sorted out in the destiny tick, which is a mess.
With the current routes from Jita to Amarr being all messed up the balance is completely wrong. The only good thing about this is if it gets bad enough the markets will adjust and then people will think the inflation since scarcity was a golden era.
Because most freighters are running max EHP fits carrying a DST worth of stuff because of ganking scum.
Yes. This has been a problem for most of EVE, always some shmuck industrialist wanting to do an activity that devalues everyone else’s work in a race to the bottom.
So all the people who were playing Pokemon Go that went to a location and got robbed by hoodlums for their phones are at fault ?
Freighter with a 20+ second 99% hull resist module, like exists for other capital ships. CCP only need to change what the existing models can be fit to.
There we go, almost.
Plus they can loose a hundred times and win once, that one win is enough to pay for a hundred more losses.
Not only pay, but choose to participate in. Player numbers tanked hard during blackout and it sent a very strong message about a mechanic that we entirely broken.
This will be an interesting argument to watch.
The basic cost for freighter hauling is probably about right. Although if the recent wait times are any indication those prices are headed higher.
But in the very special encounter when a mundane cargo run turns into a gank scenario, and the freighter pilot wins the engagement, the freighter should get something more than just escape.
That pilot brought a lot of ISK to the table to gamble, which makes the game great and exciting, said pilot should be rewarded for winning. And those winnings should come from the currently non-existent ante of the other party that choose to take a seat at that table.
Even just requiring a single (1) core to activate a criminal flag in high-sec would be a novel idea. And to add insult to injury, make these only drop in high-sec L4 missions.
That’s a bad idea because the value would plummet.
Having to buy them from NPC would ensure the price is (forcibly) stuck to where it must be. So if freighter increase in price even more, increase NPC prices.