More correctly that specific slot type which can carry the improved cargo racks are exclusive to the Panther for now. The way they worded it, there might be coming more special slot types with further new ships.
New ship: Panther Clipper
- Thread starter Rubbernuke
- Start date
I was positively surprised by the Panther Clipper Mk.II - at least as far as I can tell without flying it. The aestetics are quite lovely for my taste. From the side it reminds me a bitt of a crouching panther, the landing gear even has a design reminiscent of claws... very nicely done. The next thing I liked is, that they actually built a completely new and unique ship. FD didn't cut corners this time. The copied cockpit of the Corsair ist still a big letdown for me.... it looks and feels off - and does not convey the size of the otherwise fine Corsair. Quite a shame.
But back to the PC: I actually like the stats. I was a bit worried, that FD might give in to the demands ('wishes' is a word not strong enough here) of some of the players. Having even more cargo space would have made the colonization-feature even worse for my taste. Having the whole galaxy littered with personal 'fleet-carriers' is bad enough, I don't want construction sites everywhere. The colonization-feature itself is great, but for my taste it is FAR to easy to colonize right now. For my taste it should take many times longer to build something, than it does... but things are like they are. And I feel the PC might be quite a powerful upgrade to the Cutter or Type 9.
For me it depends one the flight characteristics of the beast... let's hope it flies nicely. Cool to have something to look forward to.
But back to the PC: I actually like the stats. I was a bit worried, that FD might give in to the demands ('wishes' is a word not strong enough here) of some of the players. Having even more cargo space would have made the colonization-feature even worse for my taste. Having the whole galaxy littered with personal 'fleet-carriers' is bad enough, I don't want construction sites everywhere. The colonization-feature itself is great, but for my taste it is FAR to easy to colonize right now. For my taste it should take many times longer to build something, than it does... but things are like they are. And I feel the PC might be quite a powerful upgrade to the Cutter or Type 9.
For me it depends one the flight characteristics of the beast... let's hope it flies nicely. Cool to have something to look forward to.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
50% is a pretty big jump imo
ps maybe I am blind , I have looked can someone link me to a post with the specs pleased. I missed FU
ps "everyone" told you no such thing. a number of people (myself included) warned you you were likely way off base with your capacity demands.
edit just found the part in FU.
I am looking forward to flying this monster. I love all the rotary bits.
I guess I will retire my T9 which is ok as will keep my T10 for mining which when sat inside has the same ship bridge
SCO optimised will give it another advantage, I just hope it can manage at least equivalent jump distances to the T9 with an A rated engineered SCO drive.
Last edited:
When the number of C1 slots a Panther Clipper has is an issue, something's not right.
There's a bunch of video's on Youtube where people do stuff like compare hauling cargo in a Cutter to a T9 to establish whether smaller capacity and more speed is better than bigger capacity and less speed.
The results I've seen haven't been especially optimistic.
Usually, it seems like a Cutter can haul more cargo in less time even though a T9 can carry more.
With that in mind, and given the PC's alleged cargo capacity, it's going to need to be really useful in some other, secondary, way for me even to consider buying one for credits, let alone Arx.
I currently have a T9 that I use exclusively as a "cargo ferry", for moving stuff to and from my FC and I suppose a PC could take on that job, although I'm kind of attached to my T9, which I've had for ten years.
Beyond that, I'd need to see how gank-proof the PC is before I consider using one for anything that I currently use my Cutter for.
nope - a Cutter hauls 794 to per load on optimized role, a T9 788 to, so the Cutter hauls 6 tons more.
Nevertheless I prefer the T9 over the Cutter as I cannot stand that ships drifting, especcially with Grade 5 dirty drives its a pain in the rear airlock....
I think (correct me if I am wrong) the T9 edges it if you want to carry a shield however.
I admit however it's been a long time since I flew one as still not got the rank (so it was back when it was in beta)
for me however the cutter just didn't look utilitarian enough for me to use as a bulk trader , where as the T9 just seemed right to me which is why I never bothered deliberately getting the rank for it.
aaaah, yes. But I fly both as hull-tanks so without shield. Together with Grade 5 dirty drives and heat-sinks, I even don´t avoid pirate-interdictions, just accept them and boost/low-wake out, for me the quickest way....
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Odd then that the results of the official poll on ship transfer were very much in line with those of the unofficial forum poll that preceded it....
The PC is SCO optimized, the Clipper and Type 9 aren't. That will be a major differentiator in systems with longer in-system hauls.
So, what happens if you put an optimized cargo module inside an optimized cargo module?
Dude! That creates a black hole and sucks you in! You are permanently removed from this universe and nobody would have a clue about your sudden disappearance. Don’t do it.
"Realistically" and "volume of the game models" have never belonged together in Elite Dangerous, so it's not a surprise that Frontier aren't starting now, though.
The T-9 is around 20 times the size of the T-6, but is only about 6 times larger in terms of total payload. Elite Dangerous has always had a design where the internal capacity goes up much more slowly than the external size.
(And comparing external volumes to how big cargo canisters are starts raising the question of why the T-6 can't carry 3000t of cargo. The T-9 in a normal fit has a density of maybe 10kg/m3 - which suggests that it's >99% empty space.)
Tueeeeeeee, Will be moaning on reddit and discord up until release, buy it and then moan after aswell.
Something I posted on the 5th. It's depressing being right all the time.
Realistic expectations win the day!
Of all the things in elite which feel like that to me (lasers of cooling being the biggest one) - oh and our magic pockets for materials - i dont mind certain ships having none modular areas which are suited to a specific thing but are tied into that ship (i could fully imagine a fixed part of a ship which was only for storage which makes better use of the space than a generic fit all rectangular rack).
indeed i would support more parts for individual ships which are catered to that ship and its originally designed role which if used give it a bit of a step up over a modular part. i am surprised people feel that is too gamey to be honest as it kind of makes sense to me. bespoke outfitting for a specific ship would be better than generic.
as for why we cant pack the ships full to their theoretical internal volume..... my headcanon is its down to
1) the thrust ability of the engines (perhaps a mechanic where A rated could lift off with heavier loads than E rated would be an interesting idea, but that is not what FD chose to go with)
2) the thickness of any armour / equipment and what not - though admittedly this is not modeled in the game having carefully inspected as many parts of a lot of the ships as possible with a fine tooth comb in VR.
There are lots of things FD could have implemented into elite to make it more complex and i have championed a lot of them over the years but it isnt what we have... but making a brand new ship which just flat out hauls lets say 300% more than anything else in the game despite being the same class of vessel**** (Large landing pad hauler) i dont think was ever gonna happen and if it did i believe would be bad for the game. (which is just my opinion and does not matter 1 jot, but it seems FD feel the same).
**** that said they did kind of do that with the Cobra V
Last edited:
its not only that...... i saw a poll for what people hoped for max capacity wise for the ship and whilst there was a spread, 1200 tons wasnt far from what a lot of people said they would be happy with.
wanting a 3000t + hauler to make colonisation less painful is totally missing the point imo. such a hauler would totally screw up trading for anything other than those using a PC - and for the 4 months or so of it being a cash only ship it would be inescapably P2W if there were any trade CGs etc.
imo if anyone wants to make colonisation less painful then they should champion adding extra features into colonisation via the missionboard or what not other than plain hauling.
or OTOH perhaps accept that FD have decided T3 stations are not meant to be done solo but are designed as group content. (which isnt what i want personally but its not my game)
Last edited:
