Should Every Ship In Elite Have A Specialisation?

[Alien]

I just saw a post in the Panther Clipper speculation thread, mentioning the Orca, Beluga and Dolphin and it occurred to me, they're the only ships that can fit the luxury cabins, and as such gives them a use.

So should each ship in Elite have something about it no other ship can do? So example, should a ship developed (in in-game lore) to fight the Thargoids, be the only ships that can fit a specific AX weapon each? Should the cargo ships have specialised cargo containers only that ship can fit? If Frontier ever bring the Moray Starboat into the game, it might be the only ship capable of landing at underwater outposts. I think you see where I'm going with this.

I'm not saying they should, I'm asking the question of if they should.

I'm interested in what you all think. Should ships have specialisations only that ship can do? Or should all ships be all-rounders (but some slightly better than others at different tasks)?

 

[r09u3]

Saying only one ship can do something is just a challenge to people not an actual fact.

 

[bangermsuk]

no, it removes customisations from all ships.

 

[Shadowsnog]

So should each ship in Elite have something about it no other ship can do?

no.
modularity of ships is one of the charms of elite.
ships might have an 'inclination' towards a certain purpose, but i find the absolute freedom of creativity of builds very essential to the game we are playing here.

 

[Monk]

I think for a lot of ships there is already one thing they are good at first or best at...except for an explicit multi-role like Cobra Mk III.

Then you jam it into whatever role you want, b/c ya know freedom and stuff.

 

[DemiserofD]

I think for a lot of ships there is already one thing they are good at first or best at...except for an explicit multi-role like Cobra Mk III.

Then you jam it into whatever role you want, b/c ya know freedom and stuff.

I mean, being multirole IS a role. Same role the Python fills really. Being decent at everything is totally a niche.

I just saw a post in the Panther Clipper speculation thread, mentioning the Orca, Beluga and Dolphin and it occurred to me, they're the only ships that can fit the luxury cabins, and as such gives them a use.

So should each ship in Elite have something about it no other ship can do? So example, should a ship developed (in in-game lore) to fight the Thargoids, be the only ships that can fit a specific AX weapon each? Should the cargo ships have specialised cargo containers only that ship can fit? If Frontier ever bring the Moray Starboat into the game, it might be the only ship capable of landing at underwater outposts. I think you see where I'm going with this.

I'm not saying they should, I'm asking the question of if they should.

I'm interested in what you all think. Should ships have specialisations only that ship can do? Or should all ships be all-rounders (but some slightly better than others at different tasks)?

I think yes. Not so much along the 'luxury cabins' route, but rather that every ship should have SOME niche where it's the objectively best choice. Like, the T8 is objectively the best medium hauler, while the Python is objectively the best medium miner. By contrast, the T7 is not good at ANYTHING, which would suggest it could use some help.

 

[Darkfyre99]

I just saw a post in the Panther Clipper speculation thread, mentioning the Orca, Beluga and Dolphin and it occurred to me, they're the only ships that can fit the luxury cabins, and as such gives them a use.

Based on in-game information and the ship’s models, I suspect a key component of a luxury cabin is the existence of a staffed recreation/observation deck in the ship itself. It’s a pity Frontier never bothered implementing proper ships’ crews. Those three ships, plus the larger Imperial ships, call for large crews to keep passengers (and/or their Commander) in the lap of luxury.

I'm interested in what you all think. Should ships have specialisations only that ship can do? Or should all ships be all-rounders (but some slightly better than others at different tasks)?

I personally prefer to customize my ships, rather than having highly specialized ships. I would’ve preferred, for example, to install a luxury deck in an Imperial Cutter over a Beluga for the flagship of Stevenson Whirlwind Adventures.

 

[SlickPBW]

No.

 

[HRDiagram]

I like it the way it is for most ships: many have clearly an idea behind, and it's easy for them to be built around that concept, but there's also room for creative builds, if one is so inclined.

The introduction of highly specialised modules on the other hand (like luxury cabins) is just a niche that does not detract from the flexibility of a ship, it's just a special feature that matches the principle behind a ship.

I would not mind special modules that only fit specific ships for very niche tasks.

But I still love my Passenger Vulture.

 

[Jack Schitt]

I'd have actually preferred it the other way around with almost no specialisation, like in FE2 where it was possible to outfit a freighter as a blockade runner with an absolutely insane number of shield generators and missiles even if it meant leaving only 5T of usable cargo space and minimal fuel. Or to make a small superpower-hopping high-speed courier with an oversized military drive and every other spare tonne of space crammed with military fuel. I understand why FD went down the route they did in ED for balance reasons, and I do like the outfitting system we got, but it feels as though something was lost without the option for truly extreme novelty builds.

 

[Elpapo]

By contrast, the T7 is not good at ANYTHING, which would suggest it could use some help.

Yep, that one should get extra 2x 6 slots or single size 7 slot. Ship of that size, being cargo hauler for large pad only and not really suited to anything nothing else, 306T way too low.
T8 has 406T capacity, being only 50T heavier in base mass, and its SCO optimized and can land at medium pads.

Before someone mention that T7 is "cheap" and thats its niche, I then would say, that currently trying balance ships by how these costs, its not relevant anymore, like it was in launch 10 years ago. T7 is really one of these ships that need help/buff, indeed.

Another thing to mention and makes me wonder, is this:

T7 - 81.6m x 56.1m x 25.4m
T8 - 99.34m x 59.96m x 25.63m

Now... those are ships dimensions, how its possible that T8 is actually larger than a T7, its wider, higher and longer, yet it can still land on medium pad, but T7 cant?
I know that T8 has retractable engines, does that also mean that T8 gets both shorter in lenght and smaller by height if engines get retacted?
Even without moving parts, T7 should fit, if T8 can, unless limit for medium hangar by ship height is like 25m... but even then, I am sure it should fit, even if that means less than 1m for ceiling at medium pad.

 

[varonica]

Yeah, they tried that with military slots for "military specialisation" of certain ships, they soon ran away from that idea following the endless demands of fuel scoops, cargo and other miscellaneous stuff players demanded to be able to be fitted into the "military" slots. Sadly due to this the explorer ships never got their own "exploration specialisation" slots, but oh well, that's life.

 

[aRJay]

Yep, that one should get extra 2x 6 slots or single size 7 slot. Ship of that size, being cargo hauler for large pad only and not really suited to anything nothing else, 306T way too low.
T8 has 406T capacity, being only 50T heavier in base mass, and its SCO optimized and can land at medium pads.

Before someone mention that T7 is "cheap" and thats its niche, I then would say, that currently trying balance ships by how these costs, its not relevant anymore, like it was in launch 10 years ago. T7 is really one of these ships that need help/buff, indeed.

Another thing to mention and makes me wonder, is this:

T7 - 81.6m x 56.1m x 25.4m
T8 - 99.34m x 59.96m x 25.63m

Now... those are ships dimensions, how its possible that T8 is actually larger than a T7, its wider, higher and longer, yet it can still land on medium pad, but T7 cant?
I know that T8 has retractable engines, does that also mean that T8 gets both shorter in lenght and smaller by height if engines get retacted?
Even without moving parts, T7 should fit, if T8 can, unless limit for medium hangar by ship height is like 25m... but even then, I am sure it should fit, even if that means less than 1m for ceiling at medium pad.

The issue with the T7 and medium pads was supposed to be height, it can fit on the pads but is too tall to fit in the hanger.
Looking at the T8 animation the engines retract on the diagonals so the ship gets narrower in width and shorter in height when it prepares to land.

 

[Rat Catcher]

No point to making a specialised ship, look at the fuss with the dedicated cabin slots on the (dedicated) Liner class ships...
Even the alleged 'dedicated' fighter ships are used for different purposes by some players, specialisation will never fly...

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

While I do think certain ships should be better at certain tasks than others, I'm definitely more in the camp that agrees with extensive customisation being possible. I think the current setup of having some combat-oriented ships with military slots, and there being some specialised modules like luxury cabins, is about as far as I would choose to push in that direction.

 

[Doctor Dread]

Regarding customization of each ship, one element was never possible but would mean a world of difference - and much fun: personalizing the size of Optional Internal slots.

Take Cobra III for example (I've left out three size 1s, let them be):
4
4
4
2
2
2

total of 18 "measures" inside.

Woudn't it be great if we could rearrange slot sizes it into, say,
4
4
3
3
2
2

or whatever Slot size combination we want, respecting the total of 18 available space?

 

[CMDR Daiyus]

Regarding customization of each ship, one element was never possible but would mean a world of difference - and much fun: personalizing the size of Optional Internal slots.

Take Cobra III for example (I've left out three size 1s, let them be):
4
4
4
2
2
2

total of 18 "measures" inside.

Woudn't it be great if we could rearrange slot sizes it into, say,
4
4
3
3
2
2

or whatever Slot size combination we want, respecting the total of 18 available space?

I've often considered the ability to rearrange internal slots as needed to optimise the loadout space. The thing is that each size is twice the capacity of the previous, so a Class 5 is actually equivalent to 8 Class 2's, a Class 6 is 16 Class 2's, etc. It might become a bit too easy to multirole all the things with that level of customisation, although I'd still welcome it with open arms. I'm not sure what the implication of running two lower tier modules vs. one higher one is either, for example hull reinforcements? Are two Class 3's engineered better than one Class 4?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I just saw a post in the Panther Clipper speculation thread, mentioning the Orca, Beluga and Dolphin and it occurred to me, they're the only ships that can fit the luxury cabins, and as such gives them a use.

So should each ship in Elite have something about it no other ship can do? So example, should a ship developed (in in-game lore) to fight the Thargoids, be the only ships that can fit a specific AX weapon each? Should the cargo ships have specialised cargo containers only that ship can fit? If Frontier ever bring the Moray Starboat into the game, it might be the only ship capable of landing at underwater outposts. I think you see where I'm going with this.

I'm not saying they should, I'm asking the question of if they should.

I'm interested in what you all think. Should ships have specialisations only that ship can do? Or should all ships be all-rounders (but some slightly better than others at different tasks)?

1 ship ? no but i would be on board with exploration ships having specific advantages and cargo ships having different ones.

combat ships already have specific military slots so would totally support specific cargo slots, mining slots or exploration ones.

maybe not lock them down totally, but a size 7 slot in a cargo ship could be size 7 for everything... except for cargo where it could take a size 8 rack for instance. lore / logic wise i can see why this would work, a compartment usable for anything but specifically designed for a specific thing means it can do better at that thing.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Should ships have specialisations only that ship can do? Or should all ships be all-rounders (but some slightly better than others at different tasks)?

I think classes of ships should have significant limitations. And should be inherently better at certain tasks. Advantages and disadvantages. For example, Large ships can haul more cargo, but can't land on small pads.

I also think:

• Ships obviously designed for combat purposes should be inherently better suited for combat. Their physical structure and layout should be inherently better suited.
• Ships obviously designed for luxury purposes should be inherently better suited for passenger comfort and travel. The compromises made for passenger & crew comfort should have a negative effect on combat capabilities.
• Ships obviously designed for bulk trade should be amazing for this. And not very great at other things.

If a company designs a product with a specific function in mind, meanwhile an existing reasonably priced generic do-everything product does it just as well... well then the company failed. If design went into a product with specific purpose in mind... it should be better. Or a failure.

 

[Elpapo]

I've often considered the ability to rearrange internal slots as needed to optimise the loadout space. The thing is that each size is twice the capacity of the previous, so a Class 5 is actually equivalent to 8 Class 2's, a Class 6 is 16 Class 2's, etc. It might become a bit too easy to multirole all the things with that level of customisation, although I'd still welcome it with open arms.

While by logic ships internals should be able to do that, but there is balance issue. Specifically HRP and guardian shield boosters are ones that would break balance if that would be possible. 2x size 1 HRP vs 1x size 2 HRP, if heavy duty, dual size 1's gives more both more hull vs size 2, and much way more resistances. Ships with enough module space, would reach like 90%+ in resistances across all types, if would stack enough size 1, if would be possible to put multiple of size 1's in higher slots. It would break game, and bigger ships would be almost immune to damage, save for absolute damage, while reaching absurd levels of raw hull points as well.

Similar for GSB, if stacked enough size 1, then some ships would be gaining thousands of MJ per higher size slot, wich also would obviously break game.

I'm not sure what the implication of running two lower tier modules vs. one higher one is either, for example hull reinforcements?
Are two Class 3's engineered better than one Class 4?

Yep, as exacly explained above.