A T9 with reinforced 5A shield and 4 heavy duty shield boosters will have about 500 mj of shields. Can hit 600mj if you go with prismatics. All this and it will still haul 500 tons. That is decent enough protection.
T9 needs more cargo space
- Thread starter J.R.Ehman
- Start date
Which it can't do because Farraguts have Witchspace Drives which allows them to warp from their location to wherever they damn well please without having to jump from system to system to system which the Corvette would have to do to Escort it. And if the Farraguts are deployed to those far flung systems, they're traveling anywhere between 100 to 500 LY. They don't do short range. Which means the Corvette is SOL trying to break 80LY and still have enough fuel for the fight and get to a friendly station.
Fixed
Gun
Platform
You said yourself:
Which the space stations are already doing and they are Stationary Gun Platforms. You don't need to be able to move very far when your job is to maintain control of a certain point.
If you want to control an area, don't use your mobile forces. They're for chasing down fleeing enemy forces and for assaults. That's what the Corvette is supposed to be doing. Not sitting there and:
V'larr said:
Keyword:
V'larr said:
Which means it sits there quietly and does nothing unless something approaches it.
These are your words. You are the one insisting the Corvette should be limited to a single system at a time when that's not the job of an Escort Class Vessel. The Job of an Escort vessel is to Escort.
Not do the job of an Emplaced Gun Platform(Space Station).
"artificially" again, judging by what? what internal structure are you giving it? what density material are you using, it can be designed any way inside, and sure devs have decided it should be that, but that doesn't mean it is 'wrong' or that the ship won't be designed appropriately according to that.
I am aware of this, but just like I said above, you do not know the density, you do not know the design, it is quite possible to make something big, but fairly light, could be made from less dense materials that still have the same strength, but just like irl, they are more expensive.
T9 on the other hand, is quite cheap, so it could be made from equally strong, but far more dense materials because they are cheaper?
also given that we do not have the actual density of the ships or their occupied space, and in how many cubic meters they both take up.
My point is saying it is done artificially while sure, 'can' be true, it can also not.
So before we go all rage rage against FDev for making the T9 'bad' maybe just maybe think that there could be a solid reason?
Add that the T9 is a LOT cheaper then a conda, a shielded trader, according to coriolis outfitter default setting, costs 99 mil.
a shielded trader conda costs: 165 mil, and before you go "that is not that much more" or similar, remember same fsd size and such, conda stock is double the price of T-9 and it cannot carry as much as the T-9, it has the saving grace that is farther jump distance and speed over t-9 so yeah, the faster ship wins out over time over the t-9 sure, but that doesn't mean the t-9 is 'bad' at what it does, especially considering its price, heck I think a modded FSD might actually help the T-9 a lot, has anyone tried that?
The T-9 needs all around work. Each trading ship gets bigger and slower but not any tougher.
The cargo space needs to exceed the Cutters by several hundred. A multiroll ship that has that range should not be able to out ship a dedicated large cargo vessel with 1/2 the jump range of the cutter.
The cargo space needs to exceed the Cutters by several hundred. A multiroll ship that has that range should not be able to out ship a dedicated large cargo vessel with 1/2 the jump range of the cutter.
For three times the sticker price of the T9 and even more to outfit, yes it should.
I would pay more for it. But it shouldnt cost as much as the trading cutter with the same jump range shields and more cargo than the T-9.
Don't Farraguts also contain docks for corvettes? The wiki states "The battle cruiser is capable of transporting and operating whole groups of Federal Corvettes, alongside housing multiple F63 Condor squadrons. It cannot be piloted by players", although I know how dubious a source of information wikis are for this kind of thing. If that is true, the Farragut would simply carry it's entire escort of corvettes with it, similar to how lone or paired corvettes would use SLFs.
The whole point of a corvette is that it is the smallest independent ship in the Federal navy, much like how corvettes are typically the smallest actual ships in modern navies. They have the hitting power to join in the full fleet actions, while also containing facilities, supplies and sufficient combat performance without having to worry about a complicated supply train. Any smaller and they would either require far too much to be outsourced to support ships or to make them ineffective in combat. Sure, people might not like their relatively small fuel tanks and jump ranges, but in the grand scheme of things a ship's endurance (particularly if outfitted with fuel scoops) would be more down to other supplies and crew comfort. For minor engagements that require a rapid response of corvettes such that they can't afford delays for refuelling and resupplying but don't warrant the deployment of a Farragut it would be easy to imagine the Federal Navy refitting some dropships to function as fleet supply ships and tankers similarly to modern ocean-going navies, with each military wing featuring 3 corvettes and a tender craft. It's probably also not a coincidence in this regard that basically every single Federal ship has such a similar jump range, logistically it makes sense to have the fleet move at a uniform speed as every craft would be limited by the slowest ship in the formation.
Cutting you off right there. Because if you're aware of the logic that dictates actual gameplay and is consider Absolute Law by Will of God(FDev) why are you arguing aesthetics such as materials used to create ships? That argument has nothing to do with actual gameplay performances which is the topic of this post.
The issue the OP brought up is "The T9 is inferior to it's chosen role as a bulk trader compared to a TradeConda." The argument it can hold more cargo has been debunked in that if both ships carried nothing but cargo racks in their internals. The T9 will hold more. If both ships had a shield that provided adequate protection. Both would haul the same amount.
So why is the Anaconda more popular? Jump range, Shield Strength, and Firepower. Two of those are because compared to the T9, the Hull Mass is ridiculously light. If the Hull Mass on the T9 was lower, it would close the gap on Jump range and Shield Strength.
The aesthetics argument only plays into ship cost which is only a factor in that the Anaconda is tuned and designed to be changed and perform in any role it's owner chose. That makes it more expensive to produce and maintain. The T9 is designed for one purpose alone which makes it cheaper to produce and therefore cost less.
This is the problem with this argument. You are basically saying that the goal of the game is to get a cutter or anaconda because they are more expensive. For any career you want these ships.
You are arguing against ship diversity.
AFAIK the Farruguts carries its escort Corvettes with it when it jumps.
It's not an activity we, the players, actually get to do ingame.
Now you're just being thick.
If you seriously are taking this literally as "Corvette physically parks next to station and blows enemy ships for a week" you are nothing short of a moron. I think it's quite clear "park" meant "stays in that system for prolonged periods of time".
Controlling a system has nothing, whatsoever, with being a "fixed gun platform".
Stations don't control systems. System security ships do. Controlling the commerce and traffic flow and crime and piracy and protecting sanctioned miners and traders and so on is what "control of a system" means.
The Corvette does not need a high jump range to serve its purpose.
And having 4x its current cost to purchase and outfit?
That defeats the entire purpose of cargo ships being more affordable for more cargo than ships of comparable price range!
I'd be fine with a new ship that costs more that continues the T-series or something, but I cannot agree with this idea.
(Honestly, 4x what it has now would it put it above every other ship in the game in terms of tankiness without any shield boosters or HRPs - it's just absurd to even contemplate it.)
Yeah, that pretty much is how the game is right now.
That's not "arguing against ship diversity", that's recognizing things for what they are. It is how it is.
Asking for more ship diversity is not a bad thing, but y'all need to start by first realizing the Type 9 is *not* an endgame ship.
Last edited:
My Federal Corvette is 700 tons more massive than the Anaconda, yet gets only 666 hp to the Conda's 945. The Anaconda has barely less armor hardness as well, along with infinitely better hardpoint placement and jump range. The real issue here is that the Anaconda is incredibly OP compared to other large ships. Really, it's more of an "Ace of all trades, disadvantaged by none" ship.
There is no valid gameplay reason that we need a ship that can carry 900-1000 tons of cargo. And if FD does introduce it will be either rank locked or so expensive that you will wish it was rank locked. What you are basically asking for is an "Iwin" button on trade CG.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Then fly an Anaconda if you think it is so good. Corvette has its advantages and disadvantages, but no one is forcing you to fly it. I own all 3 and I fly each one based on what I want to do. Corvette for Combat, Cutter for Trading, Anaconda for engineers / missions / exploration. I would never give up my Vette for Combat duty, it is way too much fun.
It's not just that I think it's the best large ship; statistically, it IS the best large ship.
And that's you being thick and willingly ignoring the description and purpose the Corvette was designed and billed as. A Patrol and Escort Vessel.
Patrolling one system is the job of short range Fighters such as the Viper.
Patrolling multiple systems constitutes as a Long Range Patrol in which it is weeks before it needs to dock and report in. Four systems before BINGO is NOT what i'd call a Patrol worthy of a Corvette. I can get seven out of my Python.
The Corvette is also used as a TRANSPORT for Military Logistics and Personnel. It is the ship that lands after Dropships have secured a zone to disgorge full divisions of troops and combat SRVs(whenver we finally get anything other then the Scarab).
if it's also a transport then it should have a range comparable to Transport ships right?
Your insistence that it should stick to a single system is not what a Corvette should be doing.
That's why the Condor and the Viper were created. They already fufill that role.
The Federation is missing it's Escort Class. Should it fill it with the Anaconda which actually does the job?
Statistically, how often does FDev change ship stats based on threads like this? Don't touch my conda.
I've just created a thread calling the Conda out for the Wunderbar-amaze-doge-do-everything ship it is. Feel free to post your thoughts there.
There is no endgame ship. There are just ships. Not everyone wants cutters condas or corvettes. I hate fighting in them they feel like someone strapped rockets to an elephant and now call it an aircraft. They are terrible ships beyond just being traders or explorers.
2 of the listed ships are multipurpose and the other is a military in nature. Although it does have plenty of room to be a hauler as well.
Multipurpose means they are okay at doing everything. They are not the best ad doing something like a Dedicated ship role. Dedicated combat roll ships like Vultures FDLs and Vipers are all good at combat alone. They are near the top if not the top in their ship size class. Same for the Diamond backs and Asp series THey are the best for their size class. The only one where that does not hold true is the largest most expensive of the Cargo vessels yet a multipurpose ship out performs it.
You have no argument other than you just want to argue. The T9 has been weaksauce since the beginning and its time FDEV addresses it.