open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Remove the Ship Maintenance cargo restriction
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:17:00 - [1]
 

Ships held in the Ship Maintenance bay (SMB) of capital ships are unable to hold cargo other than charges. Originally this was added to force a change over from using hauling carriers to having people use more Rorquals and Jump Freighters. It's now seven months later and this has happened. These ships are commonly available on the market and used to move cargo by those who need to do so. Mineral compression has been nerfed severely, with the size and composition of many items changed.
So now I have to ask - Why is this annoying restriction needed?

Issues:
a) While ammo and charges can still be held, many ships require other items in their cargo to be used. Cyno-fitted ships no longer keep their ozone with them. Many combat ships often change their fittings in space using the refitting ability of an SMA/SMB. They now need to rely on Corporate Hangar Arrays and shared roles with other corp members in order to keep things like this outside a station.

b) This restriction affects the anchored Ship Maintenance Array at a starbase. I can't think of any logical reason for this beyond programming laziness. No one is going to pick up an anchored starbase module and move the ships with cargo inside them. SMA's are however very useful for players in remote or unfriendly space to keep their ships. This restriction makes it much harder to keep fuel or alternate fittings without relying on shared corporate hangar tabs. If CCP wants to encourage PvP in more of 0.0 space, one of the first steps should be to make it easier to live there without a station to dock in.

c) Abandoned ships are much harder to clean up. Previously if someone left old ships inside a starbase shield, a carrier could simply fly by and scoop them up. Now it's a much bigger chore to clear away old ships such as Rookie ships left in a starbase with 1 unit of trit in their cargo - every ship much be boarded and moved one at a time. This of course also applies to ships left in starbases from long before the cargo nerf.

This restriction is no longer needed, please remove it.

Junkie Beverage
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:20:00 - [2]
 

please do this

Sorenson Roynex
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:20:00 - [3]
 

Well stated, makes good sense. I support this proposal.

Cap II
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:20:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Cap II on 30/07/2008 16:20:39
voting for great justice

frozenphil
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:22:00 - [5]
 

DO IT! ****!

ALlihante
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:22:00 - [6]
 

agreed

Rita Repulsa
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:26:00 - [7]
 

yes

Maho Tanaka
Gallente
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:27:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Maho Tanaka on 30/07/2008 16:28:16
"Oops you have a cyno frigate that you want to scoop into your bay? Too bad, it's got liquid ozone in its cargo."

"Oops this ship had alternative shield repping modules to swap for its weapons, and did so at your carrier's Maintenance Array. Can't put THAT in your SMB!"

Please change this. Please for the love of god. It's stupid and it makes me hate you just a little more.

xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:30:00 - [9]
 

Devs, if it really bothers you then just change it to not being able to store a ship with more than 1000m3 in its cargo bay.

please

Brmble
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:34:00 - [10]
 

yes

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:31:00 - [11]
 

I see the reason for the change, but it was ham-fisted, and I'm not convinced it was necessary. Either do something better, or just don't do anything at all, but "ammo only" is really not the right answer.

Thaadd Sligo
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:51:00 - [12]
 

Trying explain to people, what counts as ammo, what doesn't, that stupid autoload of trit....

This change would make life so much easier in dealing with dumb newbies/Goons.

Having to go 2 jump bridge hops, to switch from being a Priest Domi to something with range.... big pain. Leaving my fittings in an open access hanger is not a good idea either...

Tomic
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:56:00 - [13]
 

Yes, i totally disagreed with this nerf on RP grounds and on the fact that it just annoys everyone, whilst encouraging nothing (jump freighters and rorquals are way more efficient at moving things than carriers used to be, so if you need to move lots you will continue to use these ships).

Fahtim Meidires
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.

Posted - 2008.07.30 17:59:00 - [14]
 

If I ever decide to rp an amarr slave trader and want to have a carrier filled with haulers full of slaves, can I? Guess not Sad

/signed

agrajag119
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:49:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: agrajag119 on 30/07/2008 20:49:23
Completely agree. The reason for this change is no longer relevant, time to roll-back to the way things were. Its a pain in the neck to load up my exotic dancer, booze, smokes, and my trusty copy of Pax Amarria onto my pvp boats each time I go out.

*edit for approval.

Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:02:00 - [16]
 

Agreed.

eragon alseen
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.31 01:11:00 - [17]
 

pls

Dannie Trejo
Red Federation

Posted - 2008.07.31 10:05:00 - [18]
 

Dualboxing one character who flies a Falcon and a Buzzard and another who flies a Thanatos is a total nightmare because of this restriction. While it should be just a two click process to switch from one hull to another, instead it takes five minutes of shuffling scan probes and LO around just so I can keep my cargohold full of the things I need to go about my business.

Utterly unacceptable.

Kayl Breinhar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.31 10:06:00 - [19]
 

Agreed.

ManOfTeflon
Posted - 2008.07.31 10:13:00 - [20]
 

Carrier pilot posting to say that this is needs to be looked into.

Davor
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.31 10:27:00 - [21]
 

please yes

Dawnfiend
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.31 10:28:00 - [22]
 

Yeah you guys basically need to either start learning how un-fun your game is to play or start listening to the players who actually play your game. Fix this and maybe increase playability for once instead of adding (broken) new features that nobody asked for or wanted.

Eloryan Persago
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.31 10:46:00 - [23]
 

as you have some need to not allow the CHA of a carrier to allow it to be used for logistics as some form of "meet in the middle" not allowing industrials in the CHA of carriers could be an option.


Zy'or Tealon
Celtic Infusion Army

Posted - 2008.07.31 11:04:00 - [24]
 

Please for the love of EvE Devs take notice and act on it!

Exhumist
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:41:00 - [25]
 

Agreed.

Gabe Barr
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:48:00 - [26]
 

Seriously, this change needs to happen

Nurse Maid
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:10:00 - [27]
 

While I don't fly capitals / carriers, this sounds like a good argument..

supported

Yorda
Battlestars
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:26:00 - [28]
 

supported

Phil Miller
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:47:00 - [29]
 

yace

Kashbrok
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:47:00 - [30]
 

Very much agree.

/signed


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

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