Cargo rack capacity multiplier when fitted on large ships

[Sanshin]

The large ships should be relevant for cargo hauling, which they are not really today. This is the reason that many suggest changing their optional internal module layout. However I imagine that the challenge is to add more big optional internals to them, because these could be used for other types of modules and thus potentially upsetting the balance.

So why not just add a ship size multiplier to cargo rack capacity, meaning that cargo rack capacity is multiplied with 1,5 when fitted on Large ships. Not only would it solve the issue, but it would also be realistic in terms of the physical size of the Large ships.

Right now In many cases cargo haulers just end up with the Python, because the disadvantages of using large ships are just too big compared to the extra cargo available.

 

[Factabulous]

You live in a world where people use Pythons above Cutters/T9s? Interesting...

 

[Berpol]

The only disadvantage I saw with my Cutter was the inability to land on small outposts.

 

[CMDR Serra]

Max cargo Python - 294t
Max cargo T9 - 790t
Max cargo Cutter - 794t

Works fine for me. Yes, you can land the Python at an outpost, but for everything else a T9 or Cutter works just fine.

Hell, unengineered you can get a cutter to take 538t while carrying a 8A Prismatic and Boosters to give you 3K MJ of shields.

 

[posthy]

Considering how large the ships actually are, all of them have the cargo capacity on the low side. I think it'd be better if FDev doubles the capacity of the cargo rack modules instead.

 

[Sanshin]

The only disadvantage I saw with my Cutter was the inability to land on small outposts.

Max cargo Python - 294t
Max cargo T9 - 790t
Max cargo Cutter - 794t

Works fine for me. Yes, you can land the Python at an outpost, but for everything else a T9 or Cutter works just fine.

So for +50% or 200% in price, you get just a little over double cargo capacity, cannot land on outposts, and have 0 maneuverability.
No, I do not believe that is balanced.

 

[Raino]

my armed cutter has 256 cargo, 1x 8 size rack (not using my fuel-scoop on that one), that's fine for me...
and i am pretty sure i out maneuver many others in smaller ships (proofed by empiric testing)

 

[CMDR Serra]

So for +50% or 200% in price, you get just a little over double cargo capacity, cannot land on outposts, and have 0 maneuverability.
No, I do not believe that is balanced.

I do. Ah well...

 

[RamirezKurita]

So for +50% or 200% in price, you get just a little over double cargo capacity, cannot land on outposts, and have 0 maneuverability.
No, I do not believe that is balanced.

Roughly speaking, the progression of trade performance vs cost follows the power of 0.42 according to my calculations, so a doubling of price roughly gives 34% increase in trade performance.

This trend continues across most equivalent ships in the game, such as going from a T6 to a T7 to a T9 or going from a Clipper to a Cutter.