Original mechanics were totally different. Original ship specs do not fit with the current ED game. They are completely different games, sharing only the setting/universe.
New ship: Panther Clipper
- Thread starter Rubbernuke
- Start date
Original mechanics were totally different. Original ship specs do not fit with the current ED game. They are completely different games, sharing only the setting/universe.
Ok, I'll be happy if you'll be angry...
Last edited:
Trick question and I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday.
Everybody knows it's the guy who's running osmium because quail feathers don't exist in the game, therefore, even a SLF can haul 10 tons of non-existent cargo!
Last edited:
I think most people will be happy if the Panther Clipper MK2 ends up having 1,300 - 1,500 tons of cargo space and will be willing to spend ARX on it.
Will be ecstatic if freight tonnage turns out to be 2,000 - 2,500 tons but that will be as good as it gets. FCs can carry a max of 20,000+ tons I believe so anything more than 10% is going to be pretty unbelievable for a freighter to carry - unless you're driving a bulk carrier.
Will be ecstatic if freight tonnage turns out to be 2,000 - 2,500 tons but that will be as good as it gets. FCs can carry a max of 20,000+ tons I believe so anything more than 10% is going to be pretty unbelievable for a freighter to carry - unless you're driving a bulk carrier.
1,536 WITH a Shield, and some other bits and pieces.
2,048 WITHOUT a Shield, or anything else for that matter.
I sure hope this is the First Ship to get Grade 9 Slots.
The Type-9 has a couple Grade 8 Slots, and I see 4 Main Segments on this thing.
If the Cargo Space is only 1,024 and not much more, I will expect it to have a Jump Range (While FULL) of no less than 40 LY.
2,048 WITHOUT a Shield, or anything else for that matter.
I sure hope this is the First Ship to get Grade 9 Slots.
The Type-9 has a couple Grade 8 Slots, and I see 4 Main Segments on this thing.
If the Cargo Space is only 1,024 and not much more, I will expect it to have a Jump Range (While FULL) of no less than 40 LY.
Zero Gravity or not, Mass is still Mass.
We are not hauling 10 Tons of Weight (Mass x Gravity), we're hauling 10 Tons of Mass.
I think it will have 4 Class 9 Slots, rather than 8 Class 8 Slots.
Just going by the look of the Ship.
Class 9 = 512 Tons
Class 8 = 256 Tons
Class 7 = 128 Tons
Class 6 = 64 Tons
Class 5 = 32 Tons
Class 4 = 16 Tons
Class 3 = 8 Tons
Class 2 = 4 Tons
Class 1 = 2 Tons
Looking at the Ship's Images, there are clearly FOUR of something.
We can assume it's the Cargo Racks.
4 x Class 8 Racks (256 Tons each) = 1,024 Tons
This would only make it marginally better than the Type-9 and Imperial Cutter.
If the Jump Range took too much of a Hit for that, then it would make the Imperial Cutter still the best Long Range Hauling Ship.
I don't see if having 8 x Class 8 Slots, just simply from a UI Perspective.
If it does have 8 x Class 8, then OK, great.
LOL.
10 Tons of Quail Feathers is going to have the Higher Volume, due to the Lower Density.
However, this Game assumes that Density will always be the same.
Since Mass affects the Frame Shift Drive, rather than Volume, then, that's why the Cargo is measured by Mass.
I do find it funny though, someone carrying 768 Tons of Steel for example would have a lot of Empty Cargo Space in terms of Volume.
Compared to the guy carrying 768 Tons of Cabbages, who's squashed them into every last corner of space on the Ship.
This clearly has 4 Main Segments, clearly for the Cargo.
I'd say, that's 4 Class 9 Cargo Racks, for 2,048 Tons of Cargo.
If those are 4 Class 8 Cargo Racks, then it will all hinge on the Frame Shift Drive Jump Range.
Will this break the Economy, no, not with System Colonisation.
We need Ships with 2,048 Tons of Cargo Space.
Even if it means that every other Slot if a Restricted Slot unable to expand that beyond 2,048 Tons.
If it's locked in at 2,048 Tons without the ability to expand beyond that, then I'd accept that happily.
If it's only 1,024 Tons of Cargo space, then I'll expect a really exceptional Jump Range for that.
Will this mean the end of the Type-9, no.
The Type-9 Handles actually rather well considering.
This thing, I expect it to handle like the MAC Truck of Space.
6,000 Tons... Get real, that isn't happening.
2,048 Tons, that would make logical sense.
Based on the previous Elite II, it would make absolutely no sense to have only 1,024 Tons, I'd feel conned for sure with that.
Friendly advice: Do not set your expectations too high (particularly in terms of cargo space) because you are only setting yourself up to disappointment. Just wait for the specs to be announced, without expectations, and then you'll see.
When you have no expectations you can't be disappointed when they are not met.
When you have no expectations you can't be disappointed when they are not met.
So true!
And let's not even talk about the mass lock factor...hopefully higher than 7 this time...
I got morbidly curious and looked here again...
Do any of you know MATHEMATICS?! If you payed attention at school you would be able to know how much the panther clipper is going to be able to carry at max.
For argument sake... lets say the Hull's mass is 1200t (similar to the cutter and would mean it can fit a size 6 shield generator, which has a max hull mass bracket of 1350t)
a 7a power plant... 40t
8a thrusters (biggest we got) 160t
7a fsd (though I hope it has a 8a fsd) 80t
6a Life (just guessing it might have this) 40t
7a power distributor (just guessing it might have this) 80t
6a sensors (just guessing it might have this) 40t
6c fuel tank 64t
do the math... 1704 tons of ship.
8a Thrusters minimum mass bracket 1680t
(stripped out ship might be able to achieve maximum possible speed)
8a Thrusters optimal mass bracket 3360t
(so if the ship had 1024tons cargo with a size 6 shield of 40t it would total 2768t, excluding utility and weapons, losing some speed but still optimal!)
8a Thrusters MAXIMUM MASS bracket 5040t
(over this and the ship CANNOT fly.)
With 2048 tons cargo the ship's weight could easily exceed its optimal mass, causing the ship to lose a lot of (presuming its slow and sluggish) its already very low maneuverability and speed when it has a full cargo hold.
at max you could go and say give it... 3072tons
But at that point its jump range might become so abysmally pathetic and speed so horrendous that it would be easier and faster to do 4 trips in a type9 or cutter...
This isn't rocket science! Its a game! A very out of date but still half decent simulator game of space ships... but its still not rocket science... so its just maths!
And we don't even need to go into the spagetti code of the game cause we already have a lot of solid info IN GAME.
But its fine. Cause people who actually play elite:dangerous are sitting and playing elite:dangerous whilst the people who comment and give "feedback" on the game don't play the game at all... they just prowl the forums arguing that the panther clipper should have 6969t cargo space...
Do any of you know MATHEMATICS?! If you payed attention at school you would be able to know how much the panther clipper is going to be able to carry at max.
For argument sake... lets say the Hull's mass is 1200t (similar to the cutter and would mean it can fit a size 6 shield generator, which has a max hull mass bracket of 1350t)
a 7a power plant... 40t
8a thrusters (biggest we got) 160t
7a fsd (though I hope it has a 8a fsd) 80t
6a Life (just guessing it might have this) 40t
7a power distributor (just guessing it might have this) 80t
6a sensors (just guessing it might have this) 40t
6c fuel tank 64t
do the math... 1704 tons of ship.
8a Thrusters minimum mass bracket 1680t
(stripped out ship might be able to achieve maximum possible speed)
8a Thrusters optimal mass bracket 3360t
(so if the ship had 1024tons cargo with a size 6 shield of 40t it would total 2768t, excluding utility and weapons, losing some speed but still optimal!)
8a Thrusters MAXIMUM MASS bracket 5040t
(over this and the ship CANNOT fly.)
With 2048 tons cargo the ship's weight could easily exceed its optimal mass, causing the ship to lose a lot of (presuming its slow and sluggish) its already very low maneuverability and speed when it has a full cargo hold.
at max you could go and say give it... 3072tons
But at that point its jump range might become so abysmally pathetic and speed so horrendous that it would be easier and faster to do 4 trips in a type9 or cutter...
This isn't rocket science! Its a game! A very out of date but still half decent simulator game of space ships... but its still not rocket science... so its just maths!
And we don't even need to go into the spagetti code of the game cause we already have a lot of solid info IN GAME.
But its fine. Cause people who actually play elite:dangerous are sitting and playing elite:dangerous whilst the people who comment and give "feedback" on the game don't play the game at all... they just prowl the forums arguing that the panther clipper should have 6969t cargo space...
Cannot…resist...
(My apologies if it is a second language for you, this is just an attempt at humour)
If you paid attention during English lessons…
(My apologies if it is a second language for you, this is just an attempt at humour)
Hi All 
In the pictures posted up near the start of this topic, significantly the ones posted up by Yuri John and Rubbernuke, which shows the Panther in a landed position.
I'm aware that these pics are preliminarily still in the design stage, so this could be misleading as far as calculating distances and sizes, but nevertheless here's something I'm noticing...
There's quite a distance between the underside of the ship and the ground. Far more it seems to me than is needed to accommodate the distance to hull that our present SRV's need in deployment and boarding.
With this in mind I'm speculating whether some larger and new type of SRV's might be on the design plans. Medium to Large Military vehicles for instance. (Or vehicles for other uses).
Jack
In the pictures posted up near the start of this topic, significantly the ones posted up by Yuri John and Rubbernuke, which shows the Panther in a landed position.
I'm aware that these pics are preliminarily still in the design stage, so this could be misleading as far as calculating distances and sizes, but nevertheless here's something I'm noticing...
There's quite a distance between the underside of the ship and the ground. Far more it seems to me than is needed to accommodate the distance to hull that our present SRV's need in deployment and boarding.
With this in mind I'm speculating whether some larger and new type of SRV's might be on the design plans. Medium to Large Military vehicles for instance. (Or vehicles for other uses).
Jack
scuttles into the shadows
But I'm going to be interested in how people react to the Chonk-baby on arrival- it can't be everything so what dimension will people tolerate being bad or average? While I expect PM2 cargo capacity to be higher than anything else, I don't expect it to jump as far, but be better than a T-9 in agility and far, far slower than a Cutter.
Admittedly Elite Dangerous's simulation and game mechanics is more stable and constant than the English language. (more stable than american bbq speak and bitish engwuish)
And yes english is not my first language. Plus I tend to struggle with languages as a whole as my brain is more suited to 3d modelling and adrenaline...
(and thank you for adding that your just poking fun, I fear a lot of people forget other people cannot tell tone of voice in simple text.)
Hi
...
The most relevant question here I think is though is what do the ship design dept. consider the main roles of this ship in the game will be, what is the overall design going to end up as.
Frontier were well aware that (some) players wanted this ship to be re-instated back into the current game, have they also already decided what that role will be?...or is it presently a hot potato and are waiting to see what players thoughts and suggestions are around this topic before finally releasing the ship.
Agility?...are we thinking in terms of general combat?
I personally see it being used as a type of shuttle with a humongous cargo capacity compared to the T9 or Cutter, (around 2000t - 2500t clean cargo capacity) in it's main role, for obvious reasons.
As for outright speed I agree, slow, and armed perhaps in a more of a defensive role, plenty of weapons placed all around the hull for example but but not having them concentrated so much for forward firing. That would also depend on it's agility in this respect, if the agility is low I can't see the point in placing large weapons (except for perhaps missiles) in those forward weapons slots (if it has any slots there).
Edited for grammar.
Jack
...The most relevant question here I think is though is what do the ship design dept. consider the main roles of this ship in the game will be, what is the overall design going to end up as.
Frontier were well aware that (some) players wanted this ship to be re-instated back into the current game, have they also already decided what that role will be?...or is it presently a hot potato and are waiting to see what players thoughts and suggestions are around this topic before finally releasing the ship.
Agility?...are we thinking in terms of general combat?
I personally see it being used as a type of shuttle with a humongous cargo capacity compared to the T9 or Cutter, (around 2000t - 2500t clean cargo capacity) in it's main role, for obvious reasons.
As for outright speed I agree, slow, and armed perhaps in a more of a defensive role, plenty of weapons placed all around the hull for example but but not having them concentrated so much for forward firing. That would also depend on it's agility in this respect, if the agility is low I can't see the point in placing large weapons (except for perhaps missiles) in those forward weapons slots (if it has any slots there).
Edited for grammar.
Jack
Last edited:
also forgive me for adding this: REMEMBER that fdev do pay attention to some discussions happening. Remember the Corsair's nose? they made a ship kit to make it more "smooth"
and whilst you cannot add a ship kit to alter cargo capacity... I feel Fdev deliberately didn't tell anyone the stats as they are watching to see how LOW the community may be willing to put up with.
So we all need to keep saying the PCmk2 needs to have 2048tons minimum cargo!
And everyone needs to keep complaining about the exposed "cargo racks" so they add a ship kit that covers its ugly rump!
Cause regardless of how well PCmk2 performs I will still be incredibly disappointed in its anorexic looking body. All of its bulk is in the "thighs" and "chest" of the ship!
and whilst you cannot add a ship kit to alter cargo capacity... I feel Fdev deliberately didn't tell anyone the stats as they are watching to see how LOW the community may be willing to put up with.
So we all need to keep saying the PCmk2 needs to have 2048tons minimum cargo!
And everyone needs to keep complaining about the exposed "cargo racks" so they add a ship kit that covers its ugly rump!
Cause regardless of how well PCmk2 performs I will still be incredibly disappointed in its anorexic looking body. All of its bulk is in the "thighs" and "chest" of the ship!