Ships How to increase the surviving chances of my Type-9 Miner/Trader?

[CMDR Cknarf]

This is an excellent

To improve on yours a bit, I only removed the pulse wave analyzer and replaced it with another booster running G5 Heavy Duty w/SuperCap https://s.orbis.zone/4phg.
Shields: 846 totaling 1930 with thermal resistances. I'd say this is very good, and with the hull it has, this is probably ungankable. It can run from even CMDRs before it's too late since it has 2,600 hull hitpoints.

That’s a pretty tough T9, not far off from mine. Something to aim for, OP. An extensively modded T9 is a god damn work of art, I tell ya.

I’d advise against chaff on a T9, it’s too big of a target to make a difference.

Your goal in a T9 should always be to escape as quickly as possible. Too slow to evade, tanking until you can escape is the only option.

NPCs are easier to evade interdiction wise, and even if you fail, you can usually tank them long enough.

Players, however, are considerably more powerful, and better at interdicting. Submit/high wake is my standard procedure in that case.

Four pips to systems upon drop, select escape destination, charge FSD as soon as possible.

You should be able to survive reasonably comfortably for 45 seconds, or else your ship isn’t up to par. (You could use more defenses, OP)

It can be trickier in the rings. Mass lock, and planets blocking your destination can delay your escape.

If you are being scanned with a full load of goods, and are expecting attack,it is best to fly perpendicular to the rings to get out of mass lock as soon as possible.

For mining, I usually hang around in the ‘High’ resource sites. There’s a better yield, and a considerable police presence to keep you mostly safe from NPC threats.

 

[Northpin]

No, seriously, OP doesn't seem to have access to much engineering and i doubt he has access to Prismatics

A T9 can be a really nice trader. It can be made strong enough to survive until high wake or even stronger to actually kill the pirates.

But a miner T9? It's really not efficient. IF you make it a good miner, it cant kill pirates. If strong enough to kill pirates, it will be a crappy miner.
Plus, if you disconnect in the field and at relog the pirates are all over you then what? the only way is to highwake and go and sell whatever you have in cargo.
Not efficient.

Hence the Cutter - at least you can boost and leave them pirates in the dust or high wake at will.
No Cutter? Then a T10. Granted the T10 will have much lower cargo, but at least it can pack a punch and kill the pirates.

Anyway - my take at a T9 - sort off the same level of engineering as the one OP posted
Pick an expert SLF crew and experiment a bit with the fighters. Try one with fixed multicannons then one with fixed lasers and see which is better

 

[Speedcuffs]

No, seriously, OP doesn't seem to have access to much engineering and i doubt he has access to Prismatics

A T9 can be a really nice trader. It can be made strong enough to survive until high wake or even stronger to actually kill the pirates.

But a miner T9? It's really not efficient. IF you make it a good miner, it cant kill pirates. If strong enough to kill pirates, it will be a crappy miner.
Plus, if you disconnect in the field and at relog the pirates are all over you then what? the only way is to highwake and go and sell whatever you have in cargo.
Not efficient.

Hence the Cutter - at least you can boost and leave them pirates in the dust or high wake at will.
No Cutter? Then a T10. Granted the T10 will have much lower cargo, but at least it can pack a punch and kill the pirates.

Anyway - my take at a T9 - sort off the same level of engineering as the one OP posted
Pick an expert SLF crew and experiment a bit with the fighters. Try one with fixed multicannons then one with fixed lasers and see which is better

Disagree about the mining bit.
I have two, Painite/Core.
Yes, efficiency wise, a faster, medium ship would possibly be better. But I never have problems with pirates when logging back in.
Obviously, they're both engineered to death, lots of heatsinks. Never waked out of a ring because of NPCs, they are very predictable. YMMV.

 

[madmattnz]

I used this guide from massive D. The Ion Disruption slows down the pursuing pirates (disables drives)
I believe that mines had a rather long delay added to them a few patches ago but this has been changed to a 2 sec delay now so should be usable again. I have always found this method to Work really well

Trading - MassiveD

Anti Gankers trade tips

Source: https://youtu.be/_QCWTDpFChk

Shock Mine Launchers x2 underside - Ion Disruption special effect (Light weight mount)
2 x point defence

0A Shield Boosters - Resistance Augmented Shield boosters G5
A Military Grade - Heavy Duty G5
A Powerplant - Overcharged
A Thrusters - Dirty Drive G5
A Power Distributor - Charge Enhanced G5
A Shield Generator (1 lower than highest grade slot) Prismatics - Thermal Resistance G5
A Hull Reinforcement (lowest slot size) - Heavy Duty G5 (optional)

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

Not too bad for a pretty vanilla one, honestly.

SCBs are pretty great for making up for weaker shielding as well. No scanner on this build, since you can find decent yields in res sites without one.

No defensive weapons, either, but I know it’ll tank long enough for the cops to solve most NPC problems.

Maybe even some players, I’d you fire off the banks early after interdiction, it should outpace a fair amount of damage if you time it right.

While the cutter is a great miner, being considerably more expensive and rank locked is a definite downside.

 

[schlowi123]

Thank you to all of you for all the replies. These are more than I had hoped for.
Quite some nice ideas have been brought up. I especially liked the uncen hint to carry gold to sacrifice to pirates
But I also see that I need stuff that is not available to me right now (e.g. prismatic shields or engineering), since I'm in Colonia. But once I'm back in the bubble I'll grind for these

Don't see this post as an end of the discussion. If you have more ideas, please tell me

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

The biggest advantage of prismatics, is you can run a smaller shields, but have more protection. This frees up room for cargo.

Instead of using a size 7 (128 tons of potential cargo) slot for a regular shield, you could get away with a size 6 prismatic, or even a moddified size 5 prismatic, and still be plenty safe.

Prismatics aren’t required, they’re just preferred for that reason.

 

[Tiili]

I think you should work on winning the interdiction instead of submitting to it.

If that's too much of a challenge, you can fly near the star and put your butt towards it, then watch as your pursuers fly right into the exclusion zone.
I do this a lot with endlessly spawning bounty hunters and cops that will chain interdict me forever otherwise.

 

[Speedcuffs]

I think you should work on winning the interdiction instead of submitting to it.

If that's too much of a challenge, you can fly near the star and put your butt towards it, then watch as your pursuers fly right into the exclusion zone.
I do this a lot with endlessly spawning bounty hunters and cops that will chain interdict me forever otherwise.

Yep, heatsinks. Works well on NPCs. Dumb redacteds.

 

[fu9ar]

No, seriously, OP doesn't seem to have access to much engineering and i doubt he has access to Prismatics

A T9 can be a really nice trader. It can be made strong enough to survive until high wake or even stronger to actually kill the pirates.

But a miner T9? It's really not efficient. IF you make it a good miner, it cant kill pirates. If strong enough to kill pirates, it will be a crappy miner.
Plus, if you disconnect in the field and at relog the pirates are all over you then what? the only way is to highwake and go and sell whatever you have in cargo.
Not efficient.

Seconding this take. My T9 is for hauling, but nothing else. I run four beam laser turrets and a rack of pack hounds. I leave my crew to pilot the ship and dive out in the fighter myself. I usually use those plasma blaster things. It's not a bad rig.

 

[Rick6549]

Give it the biggest shields you can, fit reqctive armor and add some mrps/hrps

 

[Morbad]

• I have chaff and electronic countermeasured, but they seem not to work. Lasers hit me, as do rockets. Should I install point defences? Will they actuall work? Will that give me enough time to charge my FSD to enter supercruise?

ECM works against missiles, but is quite hard to use properly without significant experience. PDTs are generally a better anti-missile defense. An ECM isn't a bad idea to take in addition to a PDT or two, as it will destroy hatchbreakers, even after they've attached.

As others have mentioned, chaff is of minimal utility on a T9. It can help protect subsystems vs. gimbals, but NPCs do not subsystem target and your loadout's hull is too fragile for it to make much difference against CMDRs.

 

[C64Fan]

It’s a shame that the Cutter is so much better than the T9 for mining. The T9 looks and feels like a miner in every way. It has that industrial raw look. I like that. But the slow speed makes it risky and not efficient enough compared to the Imperial queen.

 

[fu9ar]

If you stick to safer systems where the authorities are your allies, friendly cops will spawn instead of pirates.

 

[Northpin]

It’s a shame that the Cutter is so much better than the T9 for mining. The T9 looks and feels like a miner in every way. It has that industrial raw look. I like that. But the slow speed makes it risky and not efficient enough compared to the Imperial queen.

My only problem with miner t9 is the lack of hardpoints.
My problem with miner t10 is that it seems to be missing a size 7 optional internal

 

[MK Regular]

My problem with miner t10 is that it seems to be missing a size 7 optional internal

The Type 10 trades a size 8 slot to upgrade the FSD and distributor from size 6 to size 7 and the power plant from size 6 to size 8. If you assume that core internal modules take up the same amount of space as same-size optional internals and that each size increase doubles the amount of space needed to mount a module, the Type 10 somehow managed to trade a size 8 slot (256 tons of space) for the equivalent of 3 size 6 slots and a size 7 slot (320 tons of space). Somehow the Type 10 managed to find an extra size 6 internal worth of space to use in the Type 9 chassis.

Either the Type 10 should have lost the size 6 internal on top of one of its size 8s, or the Type 9 should get another 64 tons of cargo space (either adding another size 6 internal or upgrading the size 6 to a size 7). Personally, I'm in favour of upgrading the Type 9's size 6 internal to a size 7.

 

[[VR] DDM_Reaper20]

I don't ever remember being mass locked in my Type-9... I'd just submit, boost, and wake (all pips to shields, FA-off). I only had modest-size A-rated shields (I'd rather haul cargo than a giant shield generator), and it was very rare they'd go down fully before I waked out. Just in case, I used at least reinforced hull (maybe even military, I cannot recall). I also had a lot of B-rated and reinforced modules.

I don't think I equipped chaff, since the ship is so big that it's hard to miss chaff or not. I believe I went all point defense because I envisioned missiles being the biggest threat. Maybe some shield boosters, too (it's been awhile). This was all built with PvE in mind. If I see a PvP ship, I just drop to normal space early and high wake from there or switch to Solo. The game is way too unbalanced to haul cargo through ganker-infested space.

Why is the game unbalanced if a dedicated cargo hauler cannot survive a straight-up fight against a combat vessel? En contraire, sounds pretty balanced to me. Unbalanced it would be if the afore mentioned cargo hauler easily won a fight against a dedicated combat ship, as that is not what it was built for.

The T9 fills a certain role -- hauling cargo. It CAN be made sturdy enough to survive an attack, but nothing else, and that, in my book, is highly balanced. I'd rather have specialised ships than more ships like the Anaconda.

 

[Northpin]

The Type 10 trades a size 8 slot to upgrade the FSD and distributor from size 6 to size 7 and the power plant from size 6 to size 8. If you assume that core internal modules take up the same amount of space as same-size optional internals and that each size increase doubles the amount of space needed to mount a module, the Type 10 somehow managed to trade a size 8 slot (256 tons of space) for the equivalent of 3 size 6 slots and a size 7 slot (320 tons of space). Somehow the Type 10 managed to find an extra size 6 internal worth of space to use in the Type 9 chassis.

Either the Type 10 should have lost the size 6 internal on top of one of its size 8s, or the Type 9 should get another 64 tons of cargo space (either adding another size 6 internal or upgrading the size 6 to a size 7). Personally, I'm in favour of upgrading the Type 9's size 6 internal to a size 7.

Your math is wrong.
They both have 1401 tons capacity (core, internal, hardpoints)
But T10 has 350t more hull mass. For that alone it should have a size 7

Also, the T9 got an extra size 8 internal... did T10 got any internal increase? no?

 

[MK Regular]

Help this poor CMDR, he's pinned under a rock!

Your math is wrong.
They both have 1401 tons capacity (core, internal, hardpoints)

Assuming that the ton capacity of a ship is based on 2^[module size] (with hardpoints being sizes 1, 2, 3 and 4, and utility mounts being size 0), the ton capacity of the Type 9 and Type 10 are as follows:

Type 9:

• 2x size 8 optionals = 512 tons
• 1x size 7 optional = 128 tons
• 1x size 6 optional = 64 tons
• 1x size 5 optional = 32 tons
• 2x size 4 optionals = 32 tons
• 2x size 3 optionals = 16 tons
• 1x size 2 optional = 4 tons
• 1x size 1 optional = 2 tons
• 1x size 7 core = 128
• 4x size 6 cores = 256
• 1x size 5 core = 32
• 1x size 4 core = 16
• 3x size 2 hardpoints = 12
• 2x size 1 hardpoints = 4
• 4x size 0 utilities = 4

Total = 790 + 432 + 16 + 4 = 1242

Type 10:

• 1x size 8 optionals = 256 tons
• 1x size 7 optional = 128 tons
• 1x size 6 optional = 64 tons
• 1x size 5 optional = 32 tons
• 2x size 4 optionals = 32 tons
• 2x size 3 optionals = 16 tons
• 1x size 2 optional = 4 tons
• 1x size 1 optional = 2 tons
• 1x size 8 core = 256
• 3x size 7 core = 384
• 1x size 6 cores = 64
• 1x size 5 core = 32
• 1x size 4 core = 16
• 4x size 3 hardpoints = 32
• 3x size 2 hardpoints = 12
• 2x size 1 hardpoints = 4
• 8x size 0 utilities = 8

Total = 534 + 752 + 48 + 8 = 1342

So, the Type 10 currently gets an extra 100 tons of capacity (1342 - 1242 = 100) than the Type 9 does. Of this, 32 tons are from the additional hardpoints, 4 tons are from the additional utilities, and the remaining 64 tons is from the larger core internals.

My math seems to check out, I stand by my earlier statement.

But T10 has 350t more hull mass. For that alone it should have a size 7

While hull mass typically indicates that a ship has more internal slots, it also indicates that a ship has more hardpoints, more armour, and better shielding. I don't see the issue with that.

Also, the T9 got an extra size 8 internal... did T10 got any internal increase? no?

Yes, the Type 10 did get an internal increase. On top of getting a larger power plant and FSD when it was released, it also got its power distributor buffed from size 6 to size 7 in the same patch that the Type 9 got the extra size 8 optional. Before it got the buff it had 256 tons of additional capacity over the Type 9 (not including hardpoints or utility mounts) which was translated into the additional size 8 for the Type 9. Of course, the Type 10 then got the distributor buff and gave the Type 10 another 64 tons of capacity that the Type 9 didn't have, so eh.

 

[Northpin]

Isn't simpler to just use coriolis?
Type-9, laden 2206, hull 850, max cargo 790
Type-10, laden 2556, hull 1200, max cargo 534

Laden difference is exactly 350t which is the difference from the hulls alone.
And I'm not quite sure the 350t hull difference translates only into hardness and extra hull points with absolutely no leftovers.

Cargo difference is 256t (the T9 buffed value)
You said that T9 was buffed with 256t cargo and T10 was buffed with 64t core (difference between PD6 and PD7)
That still leaves T10 192t behind the buffed T9. Adding another size7 internal to T10 would mean that T10 is still 64t behind T9

tl;dr = adding another 128t internal to T10 would make it useful, while still being behind the buffed T9