C&P loop-hole. Trade ship builds can be more than combat build ships! Even a T7!

[ITZC0ATL]

And if a ganker ship(s) [gankers are usually plural by definition] is fitted with super penetrator weapons to take out the traders FSD in one or two shots? What do they do then? A trader is not likely to fit a load of MRPs, sturdy mod there FSD (over increased range), or have military armour either... However experienced, a trader probably has a slim chance of escape in that crucial 25 seconds for their FSD to cool down and recharge, and not get it shot out from underneath them!

In short, the way to fly safe, is to not fly in Open!

Well CGs are essentially war-zones. You can make much more money hauling cargo with an articulated lorry/truck than you can in a small armoured transport, but if you're worried about being blown up, you're going to switch to something that's more survivable.

Yes, you can play in Solo or PG to do trade CGs and that's maybe not ideal, but I just can't see any feasible way for paper-thin trade builds to be able to fly without fear in a CG system. I don't think that's how this game works, at least not in Open.

In your example in question, I have an tradaconda and I'm blown up in two seconds flat by someone in a PvP ship - they will still have consequence in terms of noteriety added and increased rebuy cost. That won't change the fact that I still presented an easy target to them, and knowingly ran the risk of being blown up.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I've always had a great deal more success scooping at stars.

That will be where I am going wrong then.

 

[Herbrand]

I can kill any trader in my Diamondback Scout with ease thanks to engineers and their modules which are covered but not considered by insurance.

You clearly never interdicted my engineered traders... I'll be around the CG tonight, look forward to prove you wrong!

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I can kill any trader in my Diamondback Scout with ease thanks to engineers and their modules which are covered but not considered by insurance.
By design engineers still need alot of work especially when it comes to TTK and secondary effects that ware worth WAY more than a couple of 100 million credits.
Cascade mines and a super penetrator (C1) is all I need really. Maybe some FSD disruptor but other than that even an Eagle can do it.

You clearly never interdicted my engineered traders... I'll be around the CG tonight, look forward to prove you wrong!

And he'll be happy to log on you after you fire the first shot.

 

[Mohrgan]

And he'll be happy to log on you after you fire the first shot.

That's not fair. My few dealings with C-Kaim have always proven him to be an honorable player. This comes pretty close to naming and shaming. Even if you do have proof, this is not the way to discuss it.

 

[seko]

[Moderators, please move to a different location as you see fit, you usually do, without notification, anyway]:|

C&P update: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/405850-Crime-System-Changes
In point 3.

"you pay 10% per point of notoriety of the difference between your rebuy cost and your victims rebuy cost".

However...!

Fuel scoops are very expensive items, especially if you fit an A rated one so that your vulnerable trade ship (with no weapons) isn't sitting around near a star refuelling for ages! A large trader ship with a large fuel scoop can expect to pay:

6A 28.763 million credits (T7)
7A 91.180 million credits (Conda)
8A 289.04 million credits (T9/T10/Cutter) more than the cost of a T9, T10 or Cutter!

The cost of a decent fuel scoop may well mean that there is a good chance the traders rebuy will be higher than the murdering soab attacker... They simply don't fit a fuel scoop! Yes, they will have the cost of their weapons, but you can buy a lot of weapons for even 28mil, the same cost for a size 6A fuel scoop. Weapons are, by and large, relatively cheap items...

Shields are another thing. Most traders will fit a 'cheap' size 6A as a trader shield, rather than take up a larger slot with a more expensive shield. Yes, you can argue that that makes my point mute, but it doesn't really. A trader build can easily be a lot more expensive than an effective combat build! A 6A shield is fitted for withstanding one-off combat in mind and costs more than a 7C Biweave shield (fitted on a combat ship for sustainable attacks, rapid shield regeneration).

6C Biweave shield.. 2.696 million [T7 170MJ, T9 134MJ, T10 131MJ, 258MJ Cutter]
6A shield.............. 16.179 million [T7 217MJ, T9 303MJ, T10 227MJ, 438MJ Cutter]
7C Biweave shield.. 8.548 million [T9 257MJ, T10 256MJ, 522MJ Cutter]
7A shield.............. 51.289 million [T9 330MJ, T10 352MJ, 702MJ Cutter]
8C Biweave shield.. 27.087 million [T9 336MJ, T10 387MJ, 763MJ Cutter]
8A shield............... 162.586 million [T9 408MJ, T10 483MJ, 943MJ Cutter]

(figures taken from https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/)

Hence, making a trade ship can cost a whole lot more than a good combat ship.

I'm not a PvP combat pilot so I'll leave others to fill in that part of the puzzle, but a T9 being used as a trader ship would look something like:https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/outfi...w18RQ==..EweloBhA2AWEDMsAcICmBDA5gGzSEARghKA=
And cost 208.498 million credits, insurance 10.420 million credits.

Even a T7 trade build would look something like: https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/outfi...==.Aw18aQ==..EweloBhBmUDYAsICmBDA5gG2SEBGCQoA

And costs 70.509 million credits, insurance 3.502 million credits.

I suspect a competent combat build can be made for less than 70 million...

Here is an example build of a Chieftain: https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/outfi...18eQ==.Aw18eQ==..EweloBhBGA2EoFMCGBzANokMK6A=

Cost: 67.853 million credits... Less than a trade T7!

Hence, this whole 10% x Notoriety of the difference in rebuy cost added to the bounty may be easily circumnavigatable...

Possibly the only way to avoid this cost difference is that the trade ship not fit a fuel scoop to keep its build costs down, significantly hampering it's range for trading, which is its very purpose!

TL;DR
Trade ship builds can easily cost more than a combat ship because fuel scoops and A rated shields are so expensive compared to Biweave Shields and weapon costs, even a T7 is more expensive than a Chieftain! Hence, this difference in rebuy cost added to the bounty is probably never going to happen...

In C&P, what the devs could have included is the cost of the cargo (x some multiply), unless they scoop it up

 

[Deleted member 115407]

That's not fair. My few dealings with C-Kaim have always proven him to be an honorable player. This comes pretty close to naming and shaming. Even if you do have proof, this is not the way to discuss it.

I was talking about Herbrand, who openly advocates for combat logging here on the forum.

 

[Mohrgan]

I was talking about Herbrand, who openly advocates for combat logging here on the forum.

I don;t know Herbrand, but the rest of my statement holds true. Calling peeps out like that is poor form.

 

[Herbrand]

I was talking about Herbrand, who openly advocates for combat logging here on the forum.

I advocate it only for those being seal-clubbed or griefed. I would never do it after picking up a fight, nor I have ever done so.

Either way, your comment is completely unwarranted.

 

[Vandaahl]

Most combat builds will have reactive surface composite hulls, with the exception of FDL's, on a cutter for e.g this is 200 million more than the 8a fuel scoop.

Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Dunno if it was conveniently left out, but combat hull types are by far the most expensive things to buy.

Besides, I'm pretty sure no one ever bought a class 8 fuel scoop. For the big ship, if you take the fastest route instead of the most efficient, a class 5 fuel scoop will be more than enough to top up your fuel tank while skimming the surface at full speed between arrival and departure. Anything bigger will be a waste of money.

 

[Winter Jasra]

Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Dunno if it was conveniently left out, but combat hull types are by far the most expensive things to buy.

Besides, I'm pretty sure no one ever bought a class 8 fuel scoop. For the big ship, if you take the fastest route instead of the most efficient, a class 5 fuel scoop will be more than enough to top up your fuel tank while skimming the surface at full speed between arrival and departure. Anything bigger will be a waste of money.

Well, I've seen the 8a scoop mentioned a few times, I personally use the 6a scoop in my cutter.

It may also be worth mentioning, please don't use the chieftain posted in the op as a template for a combat chieftain lol.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

A-rated fuel scoop prices are pretty ridiculous, admittedly - more than Prismatic shields, much more than any A-rated core internal. The stereotypical exploration Asp is (by price) 2/3 fuel scoop. But that's a problem of fuel scoop pricing, not of the effects of ship price on rebuy cost.
(And if you spent the fuel scoop money on the same size Prismatic shield, you wouldn't generally need to worry about what your rebuy was, either)

 

[Lightspeed]

I use B-rated fuel scoops in preference to A-rated .... they are so much more cost effective.

 

[Hasaf]

Won't a trader, i know i do, not also just skip the fuel scoop and fit a cargo rack instead ?
Fuel is cheap enough, the profit from the extra cargo rack more than pays for it.
Plus you don't loose the time from faffing about with stars and scooping.

This, as a trader I don't bother with a fuel scoop except for two conditions. Firstly, when I am in-transit for a very long run; however, there I will normally just plan to stop somewhere along the way. Secondly, when I am taking part in a long range CG; but I don't do many of them at all.

 

[Jukelo]

Of course if you equip your ship poorly and put a useless fuelscoop that costs half your hull's value, chances are that a much cheaper combat build will kill you despite the fact TTKs are so insanely high and therefore heavily in favor of the defender.

In the bubble, an extra fuel tank makes a lot more sense than throwing money out the window with a fuel scoop. And what kind of trade route could be profitable enough to justify jumping further than what an extra fuel tank will allow?

 

[Marra Morgan]

OP, I don't think the C&P changes are designed to save traders from their own daft fitting choices.

 

[Stealthie]

I've been deliberately avoiding most of this stuff, but still...

If they were looking for a way to compare relative combat ability, why wouldn't they just focus on, say, DPS?

 

[Marra Morgan]

I've been deliberately avoiding most of this stuff, but still...

If they were looking for a way to compare relative combat ability, why wouldn't they just focus on, say, DPS?

Probably because combat alone doesn't represent experience in the game.

An high-ranked Trader or Explorer should have enough nous about them to make a survivable fitting and have the smarts to get out of trouble.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

OP, I don't think the C&P changes are designed to save traders from their own daft fitting choices.

lol

/thread

 

[A D]

Really interesting observation by the OP. It's these nuances that make the ED the choice for thinking players

However, there are just too many fit-out variations for combat and trading ships to draw a hard conclusion. FD have made it clear that the change to C & P is to discourage "seal clubbing" (Sandro actually used those words on the livestream) and I think it will probably have that effect. How well? Have to wait and see.