Buff the Traders

[Eagle Eye]

Alright. You guys enjoy tilting at windmills. I suppose the Clipper's fuel tank makes it a great trading ship.

2 hours from ASP to Clipper is totally reasonable. As is 4 hours from Python to Anaconda.

I don't know why I'm debating game mechanics with power levelers such as yourselves.

Read my post again?

2 hours from Asp to Clipper? I said 2 EXTRA hours! Which means whatever hours it takes you to go from Asp to T-7, add 2 MORE hours and you get to trade in a Clipper.

Same thing with the Clipper to Anaconda grind. If you want to have some fun / change ships (or maybe do outpost trading), you can buy a Python when you can afford it, but it will cost you an extra 4 hours of trading using said Python to reach an Anaconda. So let's say it takes you 20 hours (arbitrary number) to go Clipper - Anaconda, a Clipper - Python - Anaconda is 24 hours. There is no need for a T-9, it just slows you down.

I still have no idea how fuel tank is even relevant on a trading discussion? Or are your definition of trading is doing a rare loop? For A-B-A trading (which is what the big ships do), fuel capacity is irrelevant other than for reaching the route in the 1st place (equip a scoop, sell it for rack at your destination). The best routes are just 1 jump between station where you trade, no ship use their whole fuel over 1 single jump on their default fuel tank...

Baron rank: I said it in my original post, do missions focusing to rank up with the empire every time you got fed up with trading for a day or two. For me, by the time I have enough cash for a Clipper, I also have the rank for it.

EDIT: 6 months to Elite 1 profession, apparently that means I am a power leveller... Okay....

 

[Han Brannigan]

I say trucking in real life doesn't compare to trucking in ED and two of you need an explanation? All i can say is, lol.

I do not need an explanation. I would have liked to know where the main differences are however. Its okay if you do not want to talk about your job. And yes a firsthand experience ( esp. by someone who does cargo hauling in both rl and elite ) might be more interesting then a wiki article.
Is it the relatively huge margins in elite as compared to RL, is it the almost nonexistence of fuel costs, is it that you can fly as long as you want ( unlike in Germany for example where you have to make breaks - just skimmed your link I think its more or less the same in the States ) ...

- - - Updated - - -

Read my post again?

Reading comprehension is clearly not his forté

 

[Troa Barton]

Game should be fun first, realistic later? 5% of whole cargo you sell or just pure profit? 5% from pure profit is not enough to even cover old fuel cost lol.

No it really isn't worth it the benefit, trading in a wing needs to be rethought.

 

[Ancipital]

No it really isn't worth it the benefit, trading in a wing needs to be rethought.

A wing leader configurable profit split might be interesting...

 

[Troa Barton]

A wing leader configurable profit split might be interesting...

I would like that a lot actually, it would be a nice way to give credits to players without opening the gold seller gate, or donating enough to buy a conda in 10 minutes. You would have to play the game like everyone else.

 

[Schmack]

They're fine as they are. The devs have no doubt spent many more hours considering and comparing the various strengths/weaknesses of each ship compared to the next than you, no disrespect.

You could apply this to any suggestion thread on the entire forum.

I think they (devs) build for a certain growth speed to the game, and it would probably be more likely to happen that the conda or python had reduced cargo space than to increase the T9 by 33%. I think when mining becomes more profitable (if it ever does) and less risky, the T9 would be a better choice than the anaconda for that just based on ship price alone.

There does seem to be some "hate it" ships and "love it" ships and there seems to be consensus. The grind is to get to the conda, and that's too bad because there should be a better balance of what players want based on what part of the game they enjoy most. As it stands, you can do everything better with the conda (except dogfight but then the opponent probably doesn't get that first turn in on you anyhow).

The T9's hard points and utility points are just shy of useless because the boost speed is terrible compared to interdicting vessels. I think what the T9 offers is the ability to make large trade profits for less than half the investment of an anaconda. That's enough balance, in my opinion.

 

[Eagle Eye]

That's just 2 dimensions. From the top down the Python looks to be much fatter in the wing area. Where the T-7 only had fins, the Python could have storage capacity.

Is the Python a newer ship than the T-7?

Lore wise? No

Real life? Yes

 

[Schmack]

No. This is plain wrong. 10% is not a lot more



And? Can you pilot two T9s at the same time?

I think the point isn't about having a conda vs having two T9s, but that players who don't yet have funds for a conda could still get that cargo carrying capacity for that "sweet trade route" they discovered for half the price, because if they wait until they have anaconda funding through BH or discovery or missions, (god help them), then that deal might be weaker. So yeah, getting 500t trade capability for about half the price of a standard issue Anaconda is a great option to have. Otherwise the push is to get the T9 so you can move 700t of cargo and make a killing over any ship in the game.

If wings profits worked better so that it was a shared profit, that's fine. As it stands my wing gets a couple payments then nothing for the rest of the session, which means they lose interest (which is why I suspect is one reason the beacon trading is happening in the 1st place, no reason to fly if you're not getting paid).

 

[deathmagnet]

The only thing I would change if anything would be to give both the T7 and T9 a higher base shield value so they actually have a small chance in hell to run instead of no chance.

T7 only having 307 MJS of shield strength even when eqipped max boosters and max shield is ridiculous. Not to mention only having 168T of cargo at that point. Completely useless ship at that point.

A more realistic load out only provides 256 MJS of shield despite having A5 shields. The issue is in the initial base value given to the ship. A 31 million credit ship should not be brought to its knees by a 4-6 million credit Viper/Cobra rocking rail guns.

Same issues with the T9. 6A only provides 395 MJS shield. At 468T of cargo this is at least a realistic build but the shield value is stupid low. 7A shield with 404T is also acceptable but I am not sure 542 MJS is really enough to expect to survive. Sure you can go to 8A but really a 273 million credit ship that only runs 276T of cargo and still is only getting 710MJS shield even though you dropped 162 MILLION on shields?

You could fix the laughable shield values 1 of 2 ways or both. Give them more utility mounts to equip more shield boosters. I mean a T9 cant fit more than 4 utility mounts? REALLY? Its a huge ship. I think it can find space for 4 more. At least 2 . Same with T7. Its a big ship. I think you can find space to add 2 utility mounts.

The other way is to simply increase the base value of the shield stat for ship so the add ons are more effective.The T9 only starts with 240 base shield. T7 - 120. To compare that with its peers (size and relative cost). Clipper has base value 180, 60 more than the T7, even though its arguably the fastest ship in the game. Wouldn't the slower ship be packing more shields knowing they cant run? Federal Dropship 200. For the T9 the only comparison in price is with the Python getting a 260 base shield. In size you compare it to the Anaconda that gets a 350 base shield.

Those would be the only changes I would make. They do not need extra tonnage. They make plenty of money with the allotted tonnage they currently have. They just need to be able to protect themselves better because currently they are defenseless tin cans that carry vasts amounts of wealth, which also doesn't make sense.

 

[Troa Barton]

I think the point isn't about having a conda vs having two T9s, but that players who don't yet have funds for a conda could still get that cargo carrying capacity for that "sweet trade route" they discovered for half the price, because if they wait until they have anaconda funding through BH or discovery or missions, (god help them), then that deal might be weaker. So yeah, getting 500t trade capability for about half the price of a standard issue Anaconda is a great option to have. Otherwise the push is to get the T9 so you can move 700t of cargo and make a killing over any ship in the game.

If wings profits worked better so that it was a shared profit, that's fine. As it stands my wing gets a couple payments then nothing for the rest of the session, which means they lose interest (which is why I suspect is one reason the beacon trading is happening in the 1st place, no reason to fly if you're not getting paid).

But that should be the point of owning a type 9 making a killing at trading.
Just like there's a point to have a eagle, viper, vulture, or FDL they are cheap combat ships that are garbage in everything else but accel in their designed function.
trade ships have no reason to stay in your garage after you're done with them.
I agree that just like combat ships they should be cheap to get into but they should after upgrades be superior to multi roles and combat ships when it comes to trading. Not one of the dedicated traders do this, except for the T9 in very specific circumstances. In my type 9 I will make around 500K more per hour over my conda (yes I have both) and that's only if I'm running shieldless.
thats hardly an incentive to use it over the conda that can in a trading configuration have better shields than a combat Python and have 8 hardpoints with weapons loaded while making the route in one less jump sometimes even fewer. The advantage is lost the moment you get pirated if you play in open like I do.
There isn't really a reason to fly the lakon traders after you've outgrown them.

 

[Ancipital]

But that should be the point of owning a type 9 making a killing at trading.

..should be, but with that jump range, it's a bit crappy. Needs a spot more- it's a one trick pony, and this would make it nearly as good as a multiclass ship at that one trick.

There isn't really a reason to fly the lakon traders after you've outgrown them.

Dunno, some of us just enjoy the chunky, crude cockpits. I can see me buying another T6 some day, as I miss mine... Some of us fly certain ships just to enjoy them

 

[Pendra]

Traders need something special to make them viable over multirole ships. Making them turtles, slow, toothless, but insanely armored is valid and does not throw the current balance way off.
If you want to heist a T9, you would need a team to gang up on it. Otherwise it would slowly but surely load up the FSD and jump away.

 

[deathmagnet]

But that should be the point of owning a type 9 making a killing at trading.
Just like there's a point to have a eagle, viper, vulture, or FDL they are cheap combat ships that are garbage in everything else but accel in their designed function.
trade ships have no reason to stay in your garage after you're done with them.
I agree that just like combat ships they should be cheap to get into but they should after upgrades be superior to multi roles and combat ships when it comes to trading. Not one of the dedicated traders do this, except for the T9 in very specific circumstances. In my type 9 I will make around 500K more per hour over my conda (yes I have both) and that's only if I'm running shieldless.
thats hardly an incentive to use it over the conda that can in a trading configuration have better shields than a combat Python and have 8 hardpoints with weapons loaded while making the route in one less jump sometimes even fewer. The advantage is lost the moment you get pirated if you play in open like I do.
There isn't really a reason to fly the lakon traders after you've outgrown them.

I make more per hour in my Conda than I ever did in my T9. 2 reasons. Higher jump range equals fewer jumps and more profitable routes. Second reason is agility and speed. The fast more agile ship trades faster (i.e. in and out of ports) increasing my per hour rate.

 

[Troa Barton]

..should be, but with that jump range, it's a bit crappy. Needs a spot more- it's a one trick pony, and this would make it nearly as good as a multiclass ship at that trip.



Dunno, some of us just enjoy the chunky, crude cockpits. I can see me buying another T6 some day, as I miss mine... Some of us fly certain ships just to enjoy them

Don't get me wrong I'm at the point now where I'm collecting ships but it would be nice to have a functional reason for it to be there. I like big ships and I like functional ships so arguably the anaconda and the lakons find their way into my collection. But again the functional reason is why there's a clipper, Python, and a vulture sitting right next to them.
i quite enjoy flying my type 9 because it handles like a brick wierd I know but I like that ship. I also enjoy rare trading in my type 6 to mess with the Pirates it even has mine launchers on it! The type 6 is designed well, it needs a small buff in relation to the other traders but I can see that ship becoming a boss smuggling ship at some point.
imdont need the money gained from buffing the ships but I hate to see waisted potential. Pointless "specialized" ships bother me.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Trader ships need more of a boost to survivability and jump range imo. They feel like they're made of tissue paper atm. They are also so starved for range, you are forced to fly without any defenses or upgraded modules just to get ok range.

Change the repair and fuel costs back a reasonable amount and trade ships will have their use.

 

[Troa Barton]

I make more per hour in my Conda than I ever did in my T9. 2 reasons. Higher jump range equals fewer jumps and more profitable routes. Second reason is agility and speed. The fast more agile ship trades faster (i.e. in and out of ports) increasing my per hour rate.

you're not wrong, again in "very specific situations" on a couple of my routes the Type 9 actually brings in more cheddar. But for 98.5% of the viable trade routes out there the conda is superior as you say and for the reasons you say again you're not wrong. On top of all that you will have amazing shields, weapons and laugh at most pirates. I'm all for buffing the traders including the type 9 check out my post on page 2.

 

[Ancipital]

Don't get me wrong I'm at the point now where I'm collecting ships but it would be nice to have a functional reason for it to be there. I like big ships and I like functional ships so arguably the anaconda and the lakons find their way into my collection. But again the functional reason is why there's a clipper, Python, and a vulture sitting right next to them.
i quite enjoy flying my type 9 because it handles like a brick wierd I know but I like that ship. I also enjoy rare trading in my type 6 to mess with the Pirates it even has mine launchers on it! The type 6 is designed well, it needs a small buff in relation to the other traders but I can see that ship becoming a boss smuggling ship at some point.
imdont need the money gained from buffing the ships but I hate to see waisted potential. Pointless "specialized" ships bother me.

I'm afraid that we might mostly agree- which is probably not allowed around here. I'm not 100% sure that the t6 needs much of a buff, so we can try arguing over that, for the sake of appearances.

I'm really tempted to buy another T6 now, too, and fit it out totally inappropriately. I'm already staring at EDshipyard and wondering..

 

[Troa Barton]

I'm afraid that we might mostly agree- which is probably not allowed around here. I'm not 100% sure that the t6 needs much of a buff, so we can try arguing over that, for the sake of appearances.

I'm really tempted to buy another T6 now, too, and fit it out totally inappropriately. I'm already staring at EDshipyard and wondering..

Lol yeah for appearances I should start name calling and threatening to quit lol
And you should totally do it I have a blast running around lave in my elite type 6. I make them work for it and if they disable me I abandon all my cargo. If they blow me up its no skin off my back, its a lot of fun and it's my way of promoting meaningful player interaction.

 

[Pendra]

http://www.edshipyard.com/#/L=60W,mpU0-80-8,334s6a6u3m4s3m5A,7Sk16y15O15O7fO12G12G
What about this? Very crazy. Stop, pretend you comply, turn around and ram your attacker full boost for the kicks.

 

[Khazid]

I haven't traded much, but what bugs me about trading goods is that what it matters is mass and mass alone. 200 tonnes of cardboxes cannot be taking up he same space as 200tonnes of gold, the later taking up far less space. Basic unit should be in cubic meters or so, and tonnage affecting the FSD range. So loading 200 tonnes of lightweight machinery would take up more space than 200 tonnes of gold, but perhaps you can load more than 200 t gold, because it takes up less space, with a cost at FSD range. Trading would get a bit more complicated this way (Admittedly not in a fun way for everyone).

As for the subject of trader ship buff, in most cases like type7 vs python, python is a few times more expensive, and if specced to fight it cannot trade as efficiently. Instead of buff, perhaps a better trader ship at the same or a bit lower price range should be introduced, instead of asking the same performance. Python is an armed trader, for 56 mil. It should be a better trader than type 7 if its specced for that. If there was a 56 mil trader ship, then yes, it should carry about 350 tonnes at least. Same goes for type6 vs Asp comparison.