Going on strike.. or threatening to...has worked in the past.. you should start with that.
How can we convince Frontier to resize the T7?
- Thread starter Gryphorim
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ohnonotagain
This. The T-7 has benefits (good at interdictions for example), being able to land at an outpost isn't one of them. Use a different ship.
You overlook the Krait
The Krait is a good combat ship, but it's no python. It has less overall slots and one has to have a fighter (or why use a Krait), leaving far less space for either cargo or security.
The python can carry 192t of cargo, AND have 2800 armor (lightweight mil bulks) with 35% resists. The Krait with 192t of cargo is a wet paper bag in comparison, and the fighter, while adding outgoing dps, does nothing to improve defense while costing another defensive slot.
I have already stopped flying my Krait, despite lauding it. It;s a great ship for combat if you like using fighters. But if you're still working on your combat rank, you don't want the fighter, so for multi purpose the python is better and for general combat and tankiness, the Chief and Challenger are better.
I bet this turns into an interesting debate
I bet this turns into an interesting debate
*ties self firmly to mast* STORM WARNING!
Ironically, I've found that the Krait is so good at combat that it doesn't actually need an SLF.
I've built 4 different Kraits, now, and I've built each one with the provision to use an SLF hangar or swap it out for a cargo rack and in each case I've ended-up just leaving a cargo rack installed whenever I fly it.
Trouble is, it almost doesn't matter what your overall "build" is. As long as you stick something in all the hardpoints, you're probably going to be able to kill almost any NPC.
Sure, it's a different story for PvP but, then again, I don't think SLFs really help with PvP too much either, unless they're flown by another CMDR.
TBH, comparing them back-to-back, I'd probably say an SLF bay would be more useful to the Python than the Krait.
I agree, but you know me, the fighter is dps, and dps (and defense) are everything. I always fly with max dps and defense that I can have while still being able to accomplish the task I want to accomplish, if I were flying the Krait without a fighter, I'd have that little voice in my head, you know the one, I've talked about it before, and it's why we argue so often... 'sub-optimal, sub-optimal', until it was shouting in my ear and I had to switch to the Chief (which is still a better combat ship, but not as good a multi role). But yeh, Krait is a great ship with or without a fihter, just not quite great ENOUGH to get me out of my chief (for combat) or my Python (for boom deliveries).
Last edited:
The Krait is a good combat ship, but it's no python. It has less overall slots and one has to have a fighter (or why use a Krait), leaving far less space for either cargo or security.
The python can carry 192t of cargo, AND have 2800 armor (lightweight mil bulks) with 35% resists. The Krait with 192t of cargo is a wet paper bag in comparison, and the fighter, while adding outgoing dps, does nothing to improve defense while costing another defensive slot.
I have already stopped flying my Krait, despite lauding it. It;s a great ship for combat if you like using fighters. But if you're still working on your combat rank, you don't want the fighter, so for multi purpose the python is better and for general combat and tankiness, the Chief and Challenger are better.
I bet this turns into an interesting debate
You raised the 180t outpost cargo missions in your argument - The Python is no longer the only ship that can do them was my point. As you say there are loads of medium pad choices, each with their own strengths, I don't see a benefit to making the T-7 a medium pad ship too. It could carry more, but it's already had that buff.
It's 'my first large pad ship', and excellent for evading interdictions.
The T7 is also very cheap for its size. If it were reduced to medium, it'd have to come with a large cost increase otherwise it's nearly just another Python (yes, the Python would still be better, but as a missioning ship, the T7's cheapness would give it a colossal advantage).
Fair comment, I mistakenly thought you were saying the Krait is the equal of the python in terms of boom deliveries, which I don't think I can agree with, while I was saying that boom deliveries is where a t7 would outshine a python too successfully, due to a capacity for more cargo and more defense simultaneously. I also don't agree with it being a medium ship, I'd rather see it get yet another size 6 optional and stay large.
To be fair i've been seeing a lot of 120t deliveries while flying my krait recently...
Hmmm I suppose making the T7 medium would make the T6 redundant for cargo runs (though with G5 Dirties the T6 is far more fun to fly). The annoying thing is though that it's just because the model is a little too high, rather than the T7 actually being a large ship - footprint-wise it would easily fit on a medium pad.
The T-6 is in a similar position to the T-7, the T-6 was probably intended to be a small pad ship and if the T-7 were changed it would make sense to change the T-6 too.
I think we have two separate reasons for their being the way they are: Game design and Lore.
In terms of game design it's easy to conclude that the ships were developed before the pad sizes were set in stone and some obstacle late in the pad design process meant some ships no longer fitted where they were originally intended.
In Lore, I can see Lakon making a modern, efficient transporter with a disastrous design flaw - it was a metre too tall for it's intended role. Rather than scrap the design they modified it to hit a lower price point, turning it into a coffin but nevertheless still a stepping stone for independent traders working their way up the T-series line of ships
I should add that I'm not against the T-7 being changed, I just don't see the point making yet another medium pad ship when we have so many others now. I have a T-7 but it's fitted out for long range exploration where the pad size doesn't matter.
you can lead a horse to water....but it's really hard to keep that sucker's head under while you're trying to drown it.
