open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked For those saying freighters WOULDN'T ruin the economy. You were wrong
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

Author Topic

Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.09 01:11:00 - [181]
 

Let’s make all ships have a cargo capacity of 10m3, and EVERYONE will be restricted to 0.4 space or lower, and seal off all empire space to players just like Jove space! That’ll solve everything right???

Now more ship specializations for ANYONE! And everyone is going to be stuck in 0.4 space or lower. How irritatingly homogeneous.

You are whining, you don’t understand what you are talking about, you are comparing things that aren’t appropriate to compare.

Whiners griping about that which they do not understand is wrong.

Blind Fear
Amarr
Posted - 2005.08.09 01:21:00 - [182]
 

Restricting freighters to anywhere is ******ed.

Deleting the NPC demand for EVERYTHING is the proper solution.

Aight, we're done here.

Olivin
Gallente
Aquarium
Posted - 2005.08.09 01:55:00 - [183]
 

Edited by: Olivin on 09/08/2005 01:57:25
Originally by: Sessho Seki

Charon

“As the makers of the Charon, the Caldari State are generally credited with pioneering the freighter class. Recognizing the need for a massive transport vehicle as deep space installations constantly increase in number, they set about making the ultimate in efficient mass transport - and were soon followed by the other empires.

Regardless, the Charon still stands out as the benchmark by which the other freighters were measured. Its massive size and titanic cargo hold are rivalled by none.”

Providence

“Even though characteristically last in the race to create a working prototype of new technology, the Empire's engineers spared no effort in bringing the Providence into the world. While the massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market is said to have been what eventually made the stolid Empire decide to involve themselves in the freighter business, their brainchild is by no means the runt of the litter; the Providence is one of the sturdiest freighters out there.”

Hmmm… it would seem that CCP thinks you are wrong.



Where? Where? Oh, I see, your deep space installations located in 0.5 and above., right? LOL

Originally by: Sessho Seki

I’ll let the masses decide who is “correct”, the player whining, or the people making the game and detailing “they set about making the ultimate in efficient mass transport” and “While the massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market is said to have been what eventually made the stolid Empire decide to involve themselves in the freighter business”



I believe "mass transport" doesn't mean mass transportation and have nothing to do with "masses" of players.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

Now, why would CCP go to so much effort to specifically mention “mass transport” and “massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market” in the ship’s descriptions if they weren’t intended for “mass transport” and “massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market”???



Perhaps for the same reason as they go to so much effort to specifically mention in the nemesis description a "...stealth bombers represent the next generation in covert ops craft." Very Happy

Olivin

Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.09 02:32:00 - [184]
 

Edited by: Sessho Seki on 09/08/2005 02:34:43
Originally by: Olivin
Where? Where? Oh, I see, your deep space installations located in 0.5 and above., right? LOL


You mention where? How about look at “where” the empires (you know where it says the Caldari state, the Gallente, the Amarr, the Minmatar that created the) creating the ships and developing their technology happen to be. Oh my! That word, Empires, I wonder where an “Empire” would be based in EVE… low sec space where central governmental control is non-existent, ORRRRR in “Empire space” where the “Empire” can control its “Empire”.

Hmm… yeah that’s a thinker.

Olivin not being able to read is wrong.

Originally by: Olivin
Originally by: Sessho Seki

I’ll let the masses decide who is “correct”, the player whining, or the people making the game and detailing “they set about making the ultimate in efficient mass transport” and “While the massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market is said to have been what eventually made the stolid Empire decide to involve themselves in the freighter business”


I believe "mass transport" doesn't mean mass transportation and have nothing to do with "masses" of players.


Nice misquote Olivin, but seeing as you’re a bit on the slow side, I’ll give it to you again.

The Caldari specifically created the first Freighters as “the ultimate in efficient mass transport”. I’ll break it down for you word by word.

Merriam-Webster

Ultimate:
Etymology: Medieval Latin ultimatus last, final, from Late Latin, past participle of ultimare to come to an end, be last, from Latin ultimus farthest, last, final, superlative of (assumed) Latin ulter situated beyond

1 a : most remote in space or time : FARTHEST b : last in a progression or series <their ultimate destination was Paris> c : EVENTUAL <they hoped for ultimate success> d : the best or most extreme of its kind : UTMOST <the ultimate sacrifice>
2 : arrived at as the last result <the ultimate question>
3 a : BASIC, FUNDAMENTAL <the ultimate nature of things -- A. N. Whitehead> b : ORIGINAL <the ultimate source> c : incapable of further analysis, division, or separation
4 : MAXIMUM
synonym see LAST
- ul•ti•mate•ness noun

Efficient:
1 : being or involving the immediate agent in producing an effect <the efficient action of heat in changing water to steam>
2 : productive of desired effects; especially : productive without waste

Mass:
1 a : a quantity or aggregate of matter usually of considerable size b (1) : EXPANSE, BULK (2) : massive quality or effect

Transport:
1 : to transfer or convey from one place to another <transporting ions across a living membrane>

You see, “the ultimate in efficient mass transport” is clearly defined as being:

The “most extreme of its kind” in “productive without waste” “considerable size” “transfer or convey from one place to another”. Defined word for word from the dictionary, and yet it clearly states that the Freighter is most certainly intended for movement of large shipments, and AMAZINGLY it seems to be just the case in game, the enormous capacity ship is being used to ship enormous amounts!

MY GOD IT ALMOST MAKES SENSE!

Now, it would seem that the definition of Freighters, and what they actually do are actually PERFECTLY fitted and correct. It seems that you are incorrect.

You whining is wrong.

Especially since you are whining about a component of the game that works PRECISELY as intended and is even defined as such.


So let’s run down the list.

CCP disagrees with you (dear God what else do you need?)
Anyone here with a single spec of logic or upright thinking disagrees with you
For Heaven’s sake, the DICTIONARY disagrees with you.

You being wrong is wrong.

sonofollo
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:07:00 - [185]
 

i agree freighters as they are are fine

NPC trading good market needs more flexibility - features - events based around extra payments aka Transport tycoon deluxe and planetary populations (once they are in)

Entity
X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:17:00 - [186]
 

Thread is entertaining reading material to go through during those long, slow freighter trips. ugh

sonofollo
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:21:00 - [187]
 

we need to see more freighters runing around empire imo

MooKids
Caldari
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:31:00 - [188]
 

Freighers need to be stopped now! Why just yesterday I put up a massive buy order of tritanium and it was filled in 3 sells! I even bought it at the lowest I have purchased in a long time! And.....

Wait a minute.....

PS. Entity, I have another buy order up Wink.

Earthan
Gallente
GREY COUNCIL
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:43:00 - [189]
 

never been trading but seems like an issue that needs adressing.

High sec should be for new players.

Amon Evakrace
Primal Element
F A I L
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:45:00 - [190]
 

the guy who did the trading with the freighter is a smart guy, its not his fault the market isnt big enough no more lol. And like a guy from the MC said, just need to declare on his ass *ahem* YARRRR!!

Entity
X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:50:00 - [191]
 

Originally by: Amon Evakrace
the guy who did the trading with the freighter is a smart guy, its not his fault the market isnt big enough no more lol. And like a guy from the MC said, just need to declare on his ass *ahem* YARRRR!!


What are the odds on him going in hiding in a NPC corp, though? Rolling Eyes

Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.09 03:58:00 - [192]
 

Originally by: Earthan
never been trading but seems like an issue that needs [addressing].

High sec should be for new players.


WHEW! what would we have done without such "expert analysis" of the matter Rolling Eyes

Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2005.08.09 04:29:00 - [193]
 

Originally by: Earthan
High sec should be for new players.

They should just remove empire space completely for one week, and show everyone what importance empire space + experienced players has for this game.

Siri Danae
Gallente
Xone Trading Corp.
Posted - 2005.08.09 05:47:00 - [194]
 

Originally by: Winterblink
Originally by: Earthan
High sec should be for new players.

They should just remove empire space completely for one week, and show everyone what importance empire space + experienced players has for this game.



That would actually be pretty funny.

However I'd also like to see all of 0.0 turned into a .8 zone for a week and see how many alliance types actually notice. I'm sure the 50 that post regularly on these forums would say they did, but as for the majority? It would be a fun experiment.

Olivin
Gallente
Aquarium
Posted - 2005.08.09 10:04:00 - [195]
 

Edited by: Olivin on 09/08/2005 10:06:28
Edited by: Olivin on 09/08/2005 10:05:26
Originally by: Sessho Seki
Edited by: Sessho Seki on 09/08/2005 02:34:43
Originally by: Olivin
Where? Where? Oh, I see, your deep space installations located in 0.5 and above., right? LOL


You mention where? How about look at “where” the empires (you know where it says the Caldari state, the Gallente, the Amarr, the Minmatar that created the) creating the ships and developing their technology happen to be. Oh my! That word, Empires, I wonder where an “Empire” would be based in EVE… low sec space where central governmental control is non-existent, ORRRRR in “Empire space” where the “Empire” can control its “Empire”.

Hmm… yeah that’s a thinker.

Olivin not being able to read is wrong.



OMG. What is wrong with you brain?

Originally by: Sessho Seki

I’ll let the masses decide who is “correct”, the player whining, or the people making the game and detailing “they set about making the ultimate in efficient mass transport” and “While the massive potential for profit from the capsuleer market is said to have been what eventually made the stolid Empire decide to involve themselves in the freighter business”

I believe "mass transport" doesn't mean mass transportation and have nothing to do with "masses" of players.

Nice misquote Olivin, but seeing as you’re a bit on the slow side, I’ll give it to you again.

The Caldari specifically created the first Freighters as “the ultimate in efficient mass transport”. I’ll break it down for you word by word.

Merriam-Webster

Ultimate:
Etymology: Medieval Latin ultimatus last, final, from Late Latin, past participle of ultimare to come to an end, be last, from Latin ultimus farthest, last, final, superlative of (assumed) Latin ulter situated beyond

1 a : most remote in space or time : FARTHEST b : last in a progression or series <their ultimate destination was Paris> c : EVENTUAL <they hoped for ultimate success> d : the best or most extreme of its kind : UTMOST <the ultimate sacrifice>
2 : arrived at as the last result <the ultimate question>
3 a : BASIC, FUNDAMENTAL <the ultimate nature of things -- A. N. Whitehead> b : ORIGINAL <the ultimate source> c : incapable of further analysis, division, or separation
4 : MAXIMUM
synonym see LAST
- ul•ti•mate•ness noun

Efficient:
1 : being or involving the immediate agent in producing an effect <the efficient action of heat in changing water to steam>
2 : productive of desired effects; especially : productive without waste

Mass:
1 a : a quantity or aggregate of matter usually of considerable size b (1) : EXPANSE, BULK (2) : massive quality or effect

Transport:
1 : to transfer or convey from one place to another <transporting ions across a living membrane

You see, “the ultimate in efficient mass transport” is clearly defined as being:

The “most extreme of its kind” in “productive without waste” “considerable size” “transfer or convey from one place to another”. Defined word for word from the dictionary, and yet it clearly states that the Freighter is most certainly intended for movement of large shipments, and AMAZINGLY it seems to be just the case in game, the enormous capacity ship is being used to ship enormous amounts!

MY GOD IT ALMOST MAKES SENSE!

Now, it would seem that the definition of Freighters, and what they actually do are actually PERFECTLY fitted and correct. It seems that you are incorrect. .


LOL. You just posted most ******ed comment I saw so far here. Congratulations! But hey, you are not first ( and probably not last) interpreter of the CCP descriptions. Also, go back to you original reply where you claimed that mass transport means transport for masses of the players and try work it out using Merriam-Webster. Very HappyVery Happy

Olivin


Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.09 20:10:00 - [196]
 

Olivin you troll, you spent all that quoting me, and didn’t say so much as a single word to support your insanity.

For Pete’s sake, everything from CCP, to the people here, and even the textbook definitions to the purpose of these ships says that you are either wrong, incredibly wrong, or just out of your mind.

Do take your time in deciding which you are, as we wouldn’t want you to become any more confused.

sonofollo
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.09 20:41:00 - [197]
 

Freighters are fine as they are nothing to see here move along

Megadon
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2005.08.09 20:48:00 - [198]
 

Ruin the economy?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...Laughing

You're complaining the 1 trade route experiences the normal influences of supply and demand and your whining about it ruining the entire economy. uh-huh...

I still have more profitable trade routes then i have time to fully use. If you only have 1 route you make most of your isk on, you are a very poor trader indeed. All freighters will do in the long run is increase the cash flow of the market. Not ruin it. So some will make more $$ than others. So what. Some will always make more $$$ because they are smarter about it and that will never change. Freighters are just a variation of this theme. The smart get richer, the dumb get used.

Additionally, you need freighters to transport stuff to 0 space, AND they will be very very fun to blow up!YARRRR!!

Diversify, adapt, overcome or die.Twisted Evil

What i think would be great is if CCP would cut off the supply of NPC trade good everywhere except Lonetrek that way i could make more $$$.Cool

Thanks, have some cookies and milkSmileugh

sonofollo
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.09 20:52:00 - [199]
 

Some haulers have never seen real combat. Still NPC trade goods are fine as they are as are freighters

SengH
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2005.08.09 21:06:00 - [200]
 

Edited by: SengH on 09/08/2005 21:06:49
I was thinking about this... how about removing the NPC supply of the goods and instead releasing limited run BPCs of the trade goods that can be bought off the market. Make the NPC Demand float with the ammount sold and bought. This idea needs a ton of work but might be an alternative solution.

sonofollo
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.09 21:09:00 - [201]
 

More dynamic volume - price movement and goods that appear and even disappear based upon buy and sell volumes

Dreck Morrison
Amarr
No Quarter.
Vae Victis.
Posted - 2005.08.09 21:30:00 - [202]
 

Originally by: Nikko Forte
I think alot of people here are misunderstanding the topic's main point.

1 Man in a freighter has taken the livihood of around 100 others.

I myself used to do this trade route quit commonly... Since monday it has been impossible for anyone to do it because that 1 person is the only one able to now. He controls the NPC market on long limb roes :D




Dog gone it...all the good jobs here in Amarr are going to those low pay zones in Minmattar space. We should all go to the next G4 Economic conference and chain ourselves to the moons and spam local just to get a news bite.

Now to be serious:
Freighter == huge productivity gains for Eve which in the long run gives you time to explore other aspects of eve. Being the displaced worker is no picnic but in the long run, it is better for the overall Eve economy to have productivity improvements. Mostly because I think those translate into more fun doing other activities for more players and corps.

Dreck Morrison
Market - Prohpet

TimeKeepr
No Quarter.
C0VEN
Posted - 2005.08.09 21:52:00 - [203]
 

Originally by: Bobby Wilson
The issue here is not freighters, it is the NPC tradegoods market. And that is what needs the nerf.

Freighters have an important place in the player economy of all levels of security. Taking them out of high-sec is not the answer, especially for a problem that is obviously best resolved by modifications to the NPC market.


i couldnt have said it better myself. restricting freighters to 0.4- is not the solution. such a restriction would penalize the players who have legit (read: not being greedy with trade goods) reasons for hauling stuff around empire

Sophie Mae
Posted - 2005.08.09 21:55:00 - [204]
 

Originally by: Sessho Seki
You determining that a freighter doing precisely what any other hauler is already doing is “wrong” is a bit like saying it’s “wrong” for a battleship to kill gate rats. Sure it’s overkill to the Nth degree, but it’s not “wrong” it’s just more than is necessary. Big or small, the benefit of the kill is the same, big or small, the potential benefit of the trade route is the same, you can’t get any more money out of the trade route than is there to be earned, and size of the hauler is irrelevant.


It would however be wrong for that BS to get a higher loot reward from the same rat dropping based on the fact that they killed the rat in a BS as opposed to a Cruiser. This is what happens with freighters in Empire. When they use their cargo capacity overkill on an NPC trade route they are getting an increase in reward while not having any additional risk or effort.

Not that I am for nerfing either per se as I don't think the ecomony will be ruined by it. The NPC trade routes will survive, it will just force some players to think a bit more now as they can't rely on their old standbys.

The bigger risk to the ecomony IMO is how effeciently freighters allow players in empire to extract/create isk from the NPC market, which could lead to inflation. Yes the NPC market was always there and was being mined for isk, but now it is so much easier with a freighter that it might end up pumping more isk into the game than the economy/market can absorb leading to runaway inflation.

Sophie Mae

PS, Training for a freighter at full spped, hoping to get one before the NPC markets are nerfed Wink

Olivin
Gallente
Aquarium
Posted - 2005.08.09 22:27:00 - [205]
 

Originally by: Sessho Seki
Olivin you troll, you spent all that quoting me, and didn’t say so much as a single word to support your insanity.


I am not troll, but you are. I said enough already in two threads about this subject and have no intentions commenting your speculative interpretation of the CCP's descriptions. However, if you have anything smart to add, apart of Webster quotes, I will be more then happy to give you a reply accordingly.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

For Pete’s sake, everything from CCP, to the people here, and even the textbook definitions to the purpose of these ships says that you are either wrong, incredibly wrong, or just out of your mind.



Perhaps you new to Eve and so do you know CCP rarely know the effects of most features they implement, which by the way, had been admitted by devs many times. As for the using the items descriptions ( which often misspelled and wrong) in argument, -- this is just lame. And finally, people here are protecting their interests. Some of them already using a freighters, some are planning to use them and some simply believe that any argument or suggestions which involved removing any content from secure space is originated from 10 years old sorrow moron without real life, girlfriend and who only interested in camping gates and killing poor defenseless empire sims.


Originally by: Sessho Seki

Do take your time in deciding which you are, as we wouldn’t want you to become any more confused.



I can only recommend you to do exactly the same and next time try to post something without Webster's help.

Olivin

Wraeththu
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2005.08.09 22:58:00 - [206]
 

Edited by: Wraeththu on 09/08/2005 23:06:51
Realistically most of the threads are arguing apples and oranges.

Everyone uses the phrase "risk vs reward", but very few actually contrasts it, and especially CCP (or at least they don't seem to make changes due to it)

CCP only values "Risk" as introduced by a PC.
CCP only creates "Reward" as introduced by an NPC/Inanimate Object.

The Risk should be traded against the reward.

If Trade is to included Trade Reward, it should also include Trade Risk. Combat is not a trade risk, it's a general risk. For there to be risk in the actual trade, there needs to be the possiblity of the market dropping out on something, and vice versa. It really shouldn't have jack to do with a system's security. (there's no 'reward' for trading PC parts. You're just shuffling ISK between players)

But it does right now, and you see them moving the more profitable stuff into low-sec, for the very reason that they only feel player-introduced combat risk is viable.

Take manufacturing. There's no change that a job will FAIL. You plug the materials into an easy-bake oven, and magically they pop out product later on. The only possible risk is, again, player introduced combat risk by forcing people to gather materials from from a PvP area. I'd like to see what would happen if one of the Nations underwent a coup and the goverment confiscated all product on sell orders currently in their soverignty Wink

A mission where you fly into deadspace with a battleship, to face off 5 battleships, 20 cruisers, and 50 frigates is either considered "EARTH SHATTERINGLY HARD!" or "Feh, super easy" (and of which these two options are what effect the pay of the mission) based on the sole fact of the security level of that system. And yet, the combat will be exactly the same.

When, honestly, most 0.0 residents are plenty safe in their own area, and don't even have too many issues at choke points, with the exception of the poor suckers you live next to syndicate or PB (welcome back DIE.)

The whole concept of PvE "Risk vs Rewards" is messed up in Eve. They should either completely get rid of it, or honestly sit down and actually compare apples to apples. As it stands though, the PvE side of this game is an embarasement. Yes, it's a PvP game (and, IMO, a good one at that), but that doesn't give excuse to make other aspects of it shotty.

I mean take NPCing & Missions. People use to just kite missions and NPCs perpetually. Then they whined it was too easy. So they tried to make the NPCs faster. But PC's would just increase the speed to keep up. So they put in webbing and scrambling. So PC's started figuring out damage types and hardening. So they put in tougher and more numerous ships to deal with the hardening, deadspace to remove kiting, etc.

So now you basically NEED a T2 ship or a battleship to do some of the level 3 missions, thereby increasing risk. But the reward hasn't gone up, because the reward is based on where you are, and is based on the assumption that (X) ISK is blown up per mission.

But if the combats are the same, irrelivent of the sec level (which is true) then why is the pay less in high-sec (and by pay I don't mean just mission output, but also the modules and such that drop, which are inferior in high-sec)? Because of "risk vs reward". Which, to go full circle, just shows that it's actually a "PC Risk vs NPC Reward" equation. Which is apples & oranges.

So, realistically, the freighter is just a larger tool to exaserbate some design short-sightedness.

So, in the short term at least, maybe it would be a better idea to just remove NPC trading as a viable option. It's obviously a hold-over anyway.

Plekto
Freedom United Consolidations - Inter Terrestrial
United For 0rder
Posted - 2005.08.10 03:51:00 - [207]
 

Summary of this thread:

"Waaaaa!!! I can't adjust!!!"

Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.10 07:49:00 - [208]
 

Originally by: Plekto
Summary of this thread:

"Waaaaa!!! I can't adjust!!!"


Precisely Plekto, the world turns and the entire basis for this whining is that someone is doing BETTER than they are!?!

This is a text book case of either whining because they don’t want to work like their competitor has so obviously done, or they just want to be a troll, and Olivin, do take notes.

You say you’ve written much on the subject, and indeed you may have, but you do notice that you have no support?

How about we go and look at what Oveur HIMSELF has said on the matter? After all, if you’re going to be a twit, let’s go to the final word on the matter, the dev himself.

New Ship Classes Planned

Originally by: Oveur
Freighter
These are the new ultra-haul class of ships in EVE, with 100K M3+ specialized cargo holds. They are [however] only station to station and of course veeery slow. Make that veeeeeeeery slow.
(corrected type-o on however)

“These are the new ultra-haul class of ships in EVE”, now, I wonder what exactly would be a logical conclusion of something being called a “hauling” class of ship??? Perhaps that means it is used to HAUL things, and with it not being railed into a single hauling role, it can haul many different types of things, unlike what some here would have you believe that they are supposedly only for building outposts Rolling Eyes

“They are [however] only station to station”, hmmm, now it’s that a curious thing? Darn it all, they are designed to be station to station haulers… now Olivin you troll, do please explain, what is easily among the predominant reason to move material from “station to station”.

I’m sure the phrase you’re searching for in that obviously limited intellect “trade route”.



Hmmm… Indeed a “trade route”, now let’s look into these shall we???

You buy materials from a location, that just so happens to be IN A STATION! MY OH MY!

You locate a buy order that is hopefully one that you can turn a profit on, and figure on heading for that location, and low and behold! It’s also in a station! So you are going from a station, to a station, with the intent of selling the materials you bought for more than you bought them for.

Now, if only you could haul all the stuff you just bought, darn it all, if only there was a ship that had great capacity so you could just throw the shipment into the cargo bay and head on out.

Again TROLL, no one with any sense agrees with you:

CCP even in Oveur’s own words take the opposite view of you, and very much designed the freighter with “They are [however] only station to station”, that one line alone VERY clearly defines the width and breadth of the freighter’s function, and hauling materials out for an outpost is almost more of an afterbirth effect since which do you think would be more plausible to happen more in the life of a freighter, building more outposts, or the potential of running more trade routes.

The clear majority of people here either are against your silly point of view, or completely galvanized against you.

Sessho Seki
Posted - 2005.08.10 07:49:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Sophie Mae
It would however be wrong for that BS to get a higher loot reward from the same rat dropping based on the fact that they killed the rat in a BS as opposed to a Cruiser. This is what happens with freighters in Empire. When they use their cargo capacity overkill on an NPC trade route they are getting an increase in reward while not having any additional risk or effort.


perhaps you have not heard, but the reward by volume is identical, thus your entire argument is nullified.

No matter what capacity the ship has, the trade route’s potential profits are unaffected in any way as the trade route itself determines how much will be sold and how much will be bought for profit to be made on. If the Battleship earned more bounty off a kill than a cruiser, that would be unfair indeed, thankfully, but the freighter can’t make any more off the trade route than is there to make in any other size ship. If you made a zillion trips in shuttle on a trade route, or just 1 trip in a freighter, the amount bought/sold and the prices of the orders are 100% unaffected in any way what so ever by your capacity, as the game couldn’t possibly care less if you are in a freighter or a frigate.

The people here whining about a commodity being bought up are also the ones that wanted to do so themselves. This has been happening since Iteron 5 with 5 local hull expanders and a hold full of GSC’s. People hauling in decent frigates or lesser industrials have whined “I can’t hold as much and the iteron 5 pilots bought out all the –insert item name here- so now I have to wait for the market to reset and in the mean time I’ll just whine that someone smarter and/or better beat me to doing precisely what they have just done”.

This is economics and competition here, while the game itself does well at forcing players to follow basic rules, this still isn’t a “fair” universe and especially so in the economic sector.

We are all the product of our efforts, and some are a much better product that others. (just look at the factory seconds like Olivin). The harder you work, the greater the potential rewards. Trade route runners know this, miners know this, heck ratters know this intimately as the more they get out and kill, the greater the potential to get some great item drop.

Now, if you’re mining in a Bantam, and a Covetor flies into your belt, do you petition CCP/ISD that there is a better miner than you taking what you had planned to mine?

If you’re running around whacking rat spawns in a cruiser, and a battleship rigged for war happens to warp into the area/belt/etc you’re ratting in, do you freak out that a bigger and possibly better ship at doing what you are doing happens to choose to do that same activity?

If you do trade routes, and the trade route you were doing is bought out (and it doesn’t matter one iota by what ship they are flying) then it was the person’s right to do so. NOONE has any claim on any trade route anywhere! PERIOD! And if someone with the finances was to buy out the route from under you, then perhaps you need to not whine about them having more capability to do that, and focus on meeting or beating their capability yourself.

Olivin
Gallente
Aquarium
Posted - 2005.08.10 11:21:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Sessho Seki

Precisely Plekto, the world turns and the entire basis for this whining is that someone is doing BETTER than they are!?!
This is a text book case of either whining because they don’t want to work like their competitor has so obviously done, or they just want to be a troll, and Olivin, do take notes.
You say you’ve written much on the subject, and indeed you may have, but you do notice that you have no support?



If you don't have support by majority of this forum whiners, you probably saying something right. Didn't you know that? LOL

Originally by: Sessho Seki

How about we go and look at what Oveur HIMSELF has said on the matter? After all, if you’re going to be a twit, let’s go to the final word on the matter, the dev himself.
“These are the new ultra-haul class of ships in EVE”, now, I wonder what exactly would be a logical conclusion of something being called a “hauling” class of ship??? Perhaps that means it is used to HAUL things, and with it not being railed into a single hauling role, it can haul many different types of things, unlike what some here would have you believe that they are supposedly only for building outposts Rolling Eyes



Take a deep breath, Matilda. Nobody hold anything against ultra-hauling abilities.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

“They are [however] only station to station”, hmmm, now it’s that a curious thing? Darn it all, they are designed to be station to station haulers… now Olivin you troll, do please explain, what is easily among the predominant reason to move material from “station to station”. I’m sure the phrase you’re searching for in that obviously limited intellect “trade route”.



First of all, do keep your abusive tone in your pants. Second of all, nothing wrong about moving "material from station to station", but would you like a magic teleport tool which allow you to move any capacity to any station in one second? Sure you do. And would you like a "win button" installed in your ship? Of course you are. Nothing wrong with, you just click "I win" and game is over.

Sarcasm aside, I know for a fact that Oveur HIMSELF has said that freighters are not for farming safe trade routes in Empire. I believe it was in one of dev chats.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

I’m sure the phrase you’re searching for in that obviously limited intellect “trade route”. Hmmm… Indeed a “trade route”, now let’s look into these shall we???



Obviously limited intellect? I agree and I am sorry for you.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

You buy materials from a location, that just so happens to be IN A STATION! MY OH MY!
You locate a buy order that is hopefully one that you can turn a profit on, and figure on heading for that location, and low and behold! It’s also in a station! So you are going from a station, to a station, with the intent of selling the materials you bought for more than you bought them for.Now, if only you could haul all the stuff you just bought, darn it all, if only there was a ship that had great capacity so you could just throw the shipment into the cargo bay and head on out.



You have: t1 and t2 industrials which are perfectly capable to do what you just described.

Originally by: Sessho Seki

The clear majority of people here either are against your silly point of view, or completely galvanized against you.


I only care about some people point of view. People with intellect and deep understanding of Eve. Unfortunately they are a minority here and you defiantly not one of them.


Olivin


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only