Jump Freighters rule change?

Council Of Stellar Management Assembly Hall
1

I am asking to propose a change to CCP Jump Freighter Rules

Right now a jump freighter can’t be used to jump into HS, only HS to LS, or LS to LS or anywhere to Null.

This rule makes it impossible to avoid dangerous areas like Uedama for example. People spend real money on this game and CCP has unrealistic rules against Jump Freighters.

Let’s say this rule was to change and CCP allowed a Jump Freighter to jump anywhere it wants with no restrictions (ex. HS to HS or LS to HS).
CCP can now raise the prices on Jump Freighters to make more money on each one sold.
CCP doesn’t lose out on sales because players who can’t afford Jump Freighters will still try to go through places like Uedama with a freighter and lose it.

In turn, a change like this will allow CCP to make more money.

Smaller corps will spend more money on a jump freighter to move their products.

Players who can’t afford it will still try to move through places like Uedama and lose the ships they have and have to buy another one, and again CCP makes money because the chances are they will have to buy PLEX for the unexpected loss.

Players and growing corps and big corps will now spend bigger money to buy a Jump Freighter to allow for easier transportation of their products, and again CCP will make money.

In turn, all these changes will benefit the members and benefit CCP. With ongoing situations in lower security areas and the slow arrival of Concord doesn’t make sense to not allow a change to jump freighters. Members are constantly losing their ships and CCP has shown little effort to care. I do understand this game is based on loss and war, but how do you call it war if the bad guy always has the upper hand over EVERYONE.

I am just asking if CCP can work with players to benefit them on this one, and at the same time, CCP will make a ton more money on PLEX purchases and ISK spent.

Thanks for your time, and I ask with the truest of sincerity to please work with players for a change like this.

Thanks

1 Like
2

Why stop there? Let’s just get rid of non-consenual PvP in highsec. I mean, if veteran players can’t even figure out how to fly their 12billion isk capitals, what chance do newbros have? I mean, you could make the argument that the game is already balanced against gankers, and in favor of prey. And I suppose I could always learn risk management strats that would reduce my chances of being ganked to damn near zero, but I don’t actually want challenge or adversity. I don’t want a skill based game. I don’t want to have to learn and grow as a player. I just want the illusion of challenge of adversity, and then for someone to lightly whisper into my ear that I’m a very special boy and a really good player.
No P2W

10 Likes
3

So how have players been managing this for all of these years?..

6 Likes
4

By losing the ships they use 90% of the time. I never said it wasn’t manageable, I said it was unfair, which by CCP rules it is an unfair advantage.

5

What do veterans and new bros have to do with gankers controlling systems? I simply laid out a plan that would benefit everyone and still allow an unfair advantage towards players with lower ISK wallets. The only change is to allow a jump freighter to jump into HS.

6

EVE does not need to be any more risk averse than it already is…

2 Likes
7

uhhhhhhhh JFs have been fine for years, this would remove the awesome risk that haulers feel, sure it sucks when you get ganked but its part of the game

1 Like
8

This was an exhilarating experience and a moment in Eve I will always remember. It happened because of mistakes and ignorance on my part, not because of the rules or whatever.

Hauling with no risk would be so so boring.

3 Likes
9

I like your moxie kid.
No P2W

10

No, We don’t need any more safety. Avoiding any hint of danger is already incredibly easy with a jump freighter and if you pilot it right and are patient you can be 100% safe all the time. Your failure with Uedama is not a problem with jump freighters or a reason to modify the game.

There is already very little risk with a jump freighter with a high reward. No reason to skew it further into the safety zone.

I know right? If the problem is so bad how come I have multiple jump freighters and have lost a whole ZERO in the entire time I have played. What have I been doing wrong?

2 Likes
11

Okay, let me try again one more time, without the snark.

I’m normally a private guy, but was planning to disclose all this in a video on the subject anyway… I currently multibox VG incursions and multibox a gank fleet. So, I have actually have experience on both sides of the blaster, and I am invested in, and value, both predator and prey play styles. In other words, I think I can offer a perspective that is more informed, more nuanced, and less biased that the average forum whine on the subject.

In the relationship between gankers and prey, things are already heavily balanced in favor of prey. I could go into a lot more detail here, however, I think nothing illustrates this better than my lossmail history. I have done an embarrassing amount of PvP in HS, but have not been ganked in the past 5yrs 8mo (started playing 5yrs 9mo ago), and my biggest fear is not players, and not even rats, but DC’s -and I kind of think that there’s something wrong with that.

I mean, ganking is currently balanced so that profitable ganking is dependent on prey making one or more mistakes. So, I do think that makes sense from a prey side of things. People tend to be a lot more accepting of loss and failure when they understand that it was their own fault, and tend to get mad when they feel like they lost due to things like terrible design, bad RNG, cheating, and poor balance (i.e. no fault of their own).

However, I’ve also heard it said a billion times in presentations and dev blogs that Eve is harsh, but fair (it might even be written in the original design doc) -which is a design philosophy that I wholeheartedly agree with. So, when the biggest threat to me is a technical issue, I have to wonder if Eve is actually as harsh as it should be.

Now, I do firmly assert that balance should favor prey (especially in an area of space with a lot of newbros and risk adverse people) because of (1) loss aversion bias, (2) because there should be a place that caters to lower risk individuals, and (3) there should be an area that provides a “relatively” safe space for people to find their footing. However, I firmly assert that things do not need to be made any safer because that would just turn Eve into a kiddy pool of a game that allows more people to do more stupid stuff without getting punished for it.

To be fair, I’d imagine that different people have different tolerances for risk, and that some people just straight up have different preferences for their games, but I get frustrated when people argue that ganking needs to be nerfed (or that they need to be buffed). They’re not asking for things to be brought into balance, but pushed out of it.

So, I have to ask, “Why?” If balance already favors prey, why do people keep asking for ganking to be nerfed? Well, some people just don’t want a brutal, PvP-centric game. You can tell because they literally argue for things like permanent green safeties and an end to non-consensual PvP. I don’t know how they got here, or what they thought Eve was, but they don’t want harsh but fair. They want casual and mainstream.

So what about all the people that erroneously argue that ganking is unbalanced? Well, I’m not 100% sure, but I suspect that it is at least partially due to a loss of faith in CCP. I mean, if the game is fairly balanced and CCP is making smart design decisions, then people are far more likely to realize that they are responsible for their successes and failures. But if CCP is incompetent, then that opens the door for people to blame CCP. It has led to vast swaths of players making claims like “CCP hates nullsec,” and “CCP is ruining the game by allowing ganking to be so broken.” Instead of asking themselves what they could do differently to get a better outcome, people whine and complain and blame CCP. And other people see that, and begin to do the same. It has led to a culture of a low internal locus of control. It has led to a culture of whining and blaming others -whether it be “psycopathic gankers” or incompetent devs.

And yes, I do understand that things can be unbalanced, and in need of developer attention. But ganking isn’t one of those things. So, maybe instead of lobbying for a buff, you should ask yourself the million dollar question -“what could I do differently to get a better result?”

No P2W

7 Likes
12

Rubbish. It’s easy to avoid choke points in a Jump Freigher. Easier than many other classes of ship.

A jump freighter is an unrealistic thing to begin with, so any rules are perfectly fine in the scope of a SciFi game; and certainly cyno jamming highsec by the Empires has pretty logical basis in the Lore.

CCP makes no money on each sold Jump Freighter. Thankfully we can’t buy them with money, only with ISK.

2 Likes
13

Don’t worry, CCP Rattati is already working on it. He’s already hinted at more cyno and logistics changes following the introduction of the mobile cyno generators.

1 Like
14

I guess it all comes to effort and time spent on each activity. You can use Jump freighters with relatively low risk, but to achieve that you need to put a lot of time and effort into it.
There are a lot of players who want just to enjoy the game and not spend few hours of preparation to complete 30 minutes of activity.
In conclusion CCP is making their game so complex that either you must live/work it or just pass it. There becomes less and less space for a relaxed game style. And I forgot you can become credit card warrior and pad your losses with PLEX, I guess that is the agenda CCP is pushing.

1 Like
15

1 PLEX is 2.8p (GBP)

A Nomad will cost you 5,384 PLEX / 14bil isk

ergo a Nomad costs £150 if you wanted to buy one with cold hard cash.

Might as well buy the Black Ops pack. That way you’ll get enough change when you plex yourself a Panther for £190

1 Like
16

But you can avoid Uedama, no problem? Just jump into Tama and then gate from there.

17

Yes they can, in fact all jump capable ships can jump to a cyno in HS. The issues is you cant light a cyno in HS, what you want to ask for is a HS lightable cyno.

1 Like
18

I don’t see any pressing need to change the rules in this situation. Further, the idea that CCP can “make more money selling jump freighters” betrays a serious lack of understanding of how the market works in the game.

7 Likes
19

This is literally untrue by the nature of jump freighters. For example if you are going from Jita to rens you can literally make one jump from Juunigaishi the system prior to uedama straight to the closes LS 2 jumps from Rens.

3 Likes
20

Other people have said it better before me, but what you’re asking for is to make something that is already safe as hell even safer. Honestly I feel that jump freighters should be more vulnerable rather than less OR cost a lot more to operate considering how easy logistics has been made in this game, especially with the latest updates.