Posted - 2008.02.22 11:02:00 - [2]

 

Didn't they boost the JF not to have to nerf the rorqual and dreads cargohold?

Posted - 2008.02.22 22:47:00 - [4]

 

considering the sizable boost the Jump Freighters got (25% more base hold, more agility, more fuel efficiency etc) i doubt they changed much to the Rorqual and Dreadnought holds. Especially since the Rorqual needs quite a bit of that hold while its at work.

Posted - 2008.02.23 04:25:00 - [6]

 

Well lets hope they wont bring it to the live server, as defendability of jump freighters is zero, so logistics will just get one step harder once more. Aside from that a jump range nerf will make the rorqual even more worthless in its "intended role" as now you need a second ship to jump your compressed ores to a refining station.

Seems to me ccp is fixing this the wrong way around. There is no real competitive edge for the JF, its just that they can enter high sec too, but paying 5B extra for that is not something a lot of people will be willing to pay. If they'd just extinguish its competitor, the rorqual (also a industrial ship ffs, it should be abled to decently support industry) they think they've solved their problem: pricing the jump freighter too high in t2 parts.

They must expect that removing competition would not make the JF owners complain, as suddenly decreasing material requirements (what they really should do imo) will. Its just that the 0.1% of eve population which own a JF will produce more noise/flames/trolls if they reduce JF cost than the other 99.9% will when they will just nerf rorquals (as they already nerfed carriers).

Apart from the obvious reasons above stated such a change will also put a lot more stress on t2 component markets and in the end on moon materials, as a lot of people who are now using rorquals because of the limited availablity of jump freighters will want to buy a JF for themselves.

Posted - 2008.02.24 05:09:00 - [8]

 

Edited by: nardaq on 24/02/2008 05:16:09
Edited by: nardaq on 24/02/2008 05:15:33
5% bonus to bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman gang links per level when in deployed mode

remove deployed mode or change max velocity to -99% on the industrial core so it can warp off

Whats the point having an industrial capital with no OWN defence at al besides ****ty drones

now u can can say, get some secutiry ppl around

a hostile blob fleet sudden showing up. The sec. ppl are no match and if u just hit your next cycle your sitting duck and get ready to get ****d

Only the rorq has a needed(foreman) bonus and its in deplyment mode and rest of the capitals is not

its a tactical move, but a stupid one

Posted - 2008.02.25 23:49:00 - [10]

 

Ya, becouse poor low slots i can't do a decent/none armor tank as a gallente.
Train up capital shield booster is another 25d whasted, aka nogo.

Also im a combat char and a rorq needing mining barge V(25d) and the ship still can't mine ****e (capital strip miners? ) besides some bonuses.
A command ship can give bonus to and no needs industrial skills

Originally by: Montaire

---

The Rorqual has a pretty formidable defense. Pretty spacious drone bay, +20% per level to damage.

Also has a Capital shield tank, which can easily hold off a small ~5 man squad until reinforcements come.

I've also heard rumors of a wacky passive Rorqual setup thats pretty good.

While I agree a reimaging of the Rorqual is needed, its defenses are fine.

Originally by: nardaq

---

Edited by: nardaq on 24/02/2008 05:16:09
Edited by: nardaq on 24/02/2008 05:15:33
5% bonus to bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman gang links per level when in deployed mode

remove deployed mode or change max velocity to -99% on the industrial core so it can warp off

Whats the point having an industrial capital with no OWN defence at al besides ****ty drones

now u can can say, get some secutiry ppl around

a hostile blob fleet sudden showing up. The sec. ppl are no match and if u just hit your next cycle your sitting duck and get ready to get ****d

Only the rorq has a needed(foreman) bonus and its in deplyment mode and rest of the capitals is not

its a tactical move, but a stupid one

---

---