Panther Clipper XL!

[Noobilite]

Here is my latest proposal for the panther clipper. It's big. It's heavy. It is the largest thing that can fit on a large landing pad. And it's jump range is approximately 33ly full and 60ly empty in a fully engineered transport setup.

http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Panther_Clipper

Physically this thing would fill half of the mail slot to the inch. It's a cutter/beluga but it fills up all the space with nothing to spare. It would come with advanced docking computer as standard equipment to compensate for this.

It should turn slow in supercruise, possibly like the Type-9 or similar. It is, in essence, a double sized Anaconda with attributes of a Cutter, Beluga and type-9/10.

It was designed around the premise of holding 1440 cargo while having a Fuel scoop 6A, 6D ELP L-D Shield, GFSD5, Supercruise assist, and an advanced docking computer.

****What if this became the first Alliance rank base ship? It could be the high tier like the cutter and corvette. Maybe Alliance ships are all utility oriented primarily like the Panther Clipper and other older trade ships like the boa etc. They could revive some of the old tech as part of a bid to get people to help them economically with all mining/cargo ships. Alliance Ranks could be based on things related to transport fleets.

Altnernatively these could be bigger than the box and use shuttles and remote hookups to stations to star mission and collect passengers/cargo and be XL size and use external link/docks to use stations. Maybe bought at places with drydocks that make capital ships. Or some new external ship yard.

Estimate of Class 8 FSD: *I changed this too(should be)
8A: Cost: 162,586,478.2; Optimal mass: 3600t; Max fuel per jump: 16t*(20.48); Thermal load: 45?; Power Draw: 1.27mw?; Weight: 160t; Integrity: 188

Spoiler: Other slot 9 items I've gone over so far:

9 size slots:
All 9 sized Fuel scoops: (estimates not necessarily accurate)
9A: Cost: 916,265,169; Scoop Rate: 2.181; Power Draw: 1.27mw; Integrity: 204
9B: Cost: 229,066,292; Scoop Rate: 1.869; Power Draw: 1.088571429mw; Integrity: 238
9C: Cost: 57,266,573; Scoop Rate: 1.557; Power Draw: 0.9071428571mw; Integrity: 170
9D: Cost: 14,316,643; Scoop Rate: 1.245; Power Draw: 0.7257142857mw; Integrity: 102
9E: Cost: 3,435,994; Scoop Rate: 0.933; Power Draw: 0.5442857142mw; Integrity: 136

Presumed 9 shield:
9A Prismatic: Cost: 773,098,744.1; Mass: 640; Integrity: 203; Power Draw: 9.45?; Min mass: 1350; Optimal mass: 2700; Max mass: 6750; Regen Rate: 1.8; Broken Regen Rate: 6.66
9D Bi-Weave: Cost: 85,899,867.5; Mass: 320; Integrity: 170; Power Draw: 4.5?; Min mass: 1350; Optimal mass: 2700; Max mass: 6750; Regen Rate: 7.2; Broken Regen Rate: 18

SCB:
9A SCB: Cost: 76,298,292; Mass: 320t; Integrity: 204; Power Draw: 3.86mw; Duration: 20.69s; Shield reinforcement: 73/s; Thermal Load: 880; Max Ammo: 4(approx: 1510.5mjx4; 1745mjx4 max engineered)

FSD:
8A: Cost: 162,586,478.2; Optimal mass: 3600*(4200)t; Max fuel per jump: 20.48; Thermal load: 45?; Power Draw: 1.05mw; Weight: 160t; Integrity: 188
8E: Cost: 2,007,243.99; Optimal mass: 2240t; Max fuel per jump: 13.65333; Thermal load: 45?; Power Draw: 0.56mw; Weight: 160t; Integrity: 134

AFMU:
9A: Cost: 89,261,676; Integrity: 196; Power Draw: 4.82; Repair Capacity: 12,500

Cargo:
9E Cargo: 12,447,078, Credits 512 cargo.

Limpets:
9A Prospector Limpet: Range: 17,500, Max Limpets: 16, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 360t, Cost: 62,985,600
9A Collector Limpet: Range: 3,000, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.28mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 512t, Cost: 62,985,600
9E Decontamination Limpet: Range: 3280, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.5mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 290t, Cost: 11,809,800
9A Fuel Tranfer Limpet: Range: 3,500, Max Limpets: 16, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600
9A Hatch Breaker Limpet: Active Range: 8,080, Target Range: 7,980, Hack Time: 0s, Max Limpets: 24, Power Draw: 1.26mw, Integrity: 200, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600
9E Recon Limpet: Range: 2,300-2,400, Hack Time: 8s, Max Limpets: 1, Power Draw: 1.5mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 290t, Cost: ?
9A Repair Limpet: Range: 3,500, Repair Capacity: 600, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600

Ship:
Jump range:
Max: ((1000^(1/2.9))6670.4((20.48/12)^(1/2.9)))/1582.83=54.8594742755435ly <- No boost
Max: ((1000^(1/2.9))6670.4((20.48/12)^(1/2.9)))/1584.13=ly 65.3144544119224ly<- Boost

More accurate value:
Real Panther Clipper 1337 hull <- Max jump range of 54.858ly without boost! This is based on proper 8A FSD and real proportions from the original game! Max with boost = 65.35ly!

Cost: 506,787,330.3 Million / 420 Million with 15% and 2.5%off. (If too OP raise price to 1,440,000,000 credits base cost!! 8p)
Base Hull: 1350
Mass Lock: 25-30?
Hull Hardness: 65?!
Integrity: 1350(750base)
Cargo Max: 1666(1500 equipped)(Assumes 6AFS, 6DELP+LD Shield, 5GFSB, SCA, ADC)
Landing Pad: Large
Boost capacity: 27mj?
Crew: 3+? Max NPC fighters: 2? <- First ship to allow this. Could compensates for slowness and/or rear turret weakness. Adds to overall cost from crew profits.
or:
Shuttle Crew: 9 New Mechanic! (12 total crew.)
Fuel Reserve: 1.35t
Heat Capacity: 337.5?
Minimum Heat Dissipation: 3.6?
Maximum Heat Dissipation: 72?
Base Shield: 600
Base Armor: 750
Minimum Thrust: 35%
Top Speed: 140 m/s
Boost Speed: 200 m/s

Maneuverability: 0(Total Guess)(copied from EDSY)(This is both optimal for in normal space and supercruise to give it a uniform feel.)(#=Degrees/second)
Pitch: 22
Yaw: 10
Roll: 22
Min Pitch: 18

Core Internals: (Max value.)(updated)
Armor: 1
Power Plant: 8
Thrusters: 8
FSD: 8
Life Support: 5
Power Distributor: 8
Sensors: 3
Fuel: 8

Other Examples:
7 engine, 7FSD, 8 PP, 7 tank 2.7billion, 4xl Turret(just cost estimated), 4k armor, 2k shields, 9A Fuel scoop(2.181/s), 135m rebuy. <-Outdated unless 9's are added. And still incorrect values even then. Only good for general cost estimate.

Optional Internals: (1666/1500/1440) (Assumes 7AFS, 6DELP+LD Shield, 5GFSB, SCA or ADC(1440); or 6AFS, 6DELP+LD Shield, 5GFSB, SCA and ADC(1500))

9
9
7
7
7
7
6
5
4
3
2
2
1

Or: (1666/1500/1440) (Assumes 7AFS, 6DELP+LD Shield, 5GFSB, SCA or ADC(1440); or 6AFS, 6DELP+LD Shield, 5GFSB, SCA and ADC(1500))

9
9
8
7
6
6
6
5
4
3
2
2
1

Or: (basically derived from this.)

9
8
8
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
4
3
2
2
1

Or: If no 9 slots exist: 1500/1666(1664) (6FS, 6Shield, 5GFS, SCA, ACD)

8
8
8
8
8
7
6
6
6
5
4
3
2
2 or 1
1

Or:
8
8
8
8
8
8
6
5
4
3
2
1
1

Hardpoints: *

H or XL(turreted/gimbaled version(s) of the H slot items. Potentially the same weapons on capital ships.)
M
M
M
S
S
S
S
S
S
^-6x mining lance build.

Or:
H or XL
L
L
M
M
M
S
^-3x2B mining + 1 mining lance build.

Utility: 8x

Could be given a new type of xl weapon in place of the huge to go with the name. It would be a weapon somewhat like the turrets on a capitol ship. Weaker if needed. It would be huge turret basically. It could also be a one of a kind non removable weapon. Potentially none engineerable also. AKA, permanent weight. Or just a slot with a capital ship weapon on it.

*Allows 4 larger forward weapons in the front and 6 small turrets on all 6 sides of the ship for defense. Although the point of the Small slots is to allow all 6 forward fireing Mining lances in a mining setup. So the trick is to allow forward firing lances and still have a means of defense. This could open up weaknesses or have the medium slots setup as turrets instead. Although you only need 6 aiming forward enough to hit. That could be a limiting factor. Then you can't get a fully ideal setup for strip mining. Have to pick and choose which slots for lances for fastest mining. Or have them all forwards and the rest would be smaller fissure/surface mining gear and abrasion blasters. A weakness in the direct rear might be a good balance design for smaller ships to fight it.

Luckily, It can run a lot of collector limpets. Probably more than it needs. So, it should be good at being anything utility based in the game.

Or for being a fully armed and operational battle station!!!

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7-tskP0OzI
And the seat in the panther clipper should look just like the emperors chair and the entire cockpit should look just like the throne room!

Source: https://youtu.be/ZuPe-ly0BHM?t=12
And if you want to be really runny. It could be allowed 2 SLF with npcs. It could excuse it as a slot for one attack SLF and one cargo SLF. But could be used for either. 8)

 

[Lestat]

I have to say No unless they make this as a Ship carrier. Which would have a reason to carry that much load.

 

[Noobilite]

I would think a ship carrier would hold more than double the cutter. I would think it would hold at least 8x the cutter or more.

The point is you can pretty much make one uber ship for end game and goof around. Even if it's not the greatest jump range.

 

[MK Regular]

Every time I see another Panther Clipper thread I am more and more tempted to make a Panther Clipper thread thread. Given how many threads about the Panther Clipper exist, I could probably have some categories in it for suggested configurations, added game mechanics, etc...

Maybe if FDev actually sees how many threads have been made about the Panther Clipper they'll actually stop twiddling their thumbs and add it. Of course, that's assuming that they know how they want the ship to be configured....

 

[M00ka]

Just a question (and I am not saying NO to your suggestion, lets get that clear) but if your proposed Panther can carry 1440T that is nearly twice the volume capacity of either a T-9 or a Cutter. Yet both those ships barely fit onto a large landing pad now so how is your Panther going to fit on a Large Pad and made it through the mail slot? I know you have already mentioned that but I think you are being a little ambitious in the amount of cargo it can carry and still enter and exit a station and land.

Also what is it's downside? Every ship in the game has one, some counter so it doesn't automatically become the meta and the only ship being used. True the Anaconda came very close to that until the Cutter/Corvette were introduced but since then there really hasn't been a 'perfect' ship that doesn't have an Achilles heel somewhere. If it is going to be designed as a shield tank, what does it need so much offensive hardware, it only needs one or the other, not both in my opinion.

Well done on coming up with all the stats, I just personally think it is a little OP and the last thing I want to see if everyone flying the same ship and ignoring everything else.

 

[Noobilite]

I've looked over this in the past. Both of those ships are either thin(cutter) or short(type-9). If you filled out every inch of the pad it would come to more than double either of those ships so it should be reasonable. Look at their geometry and think how much could go in if you expanded the hulls all the way out.

You could literally tripple the type-9 and fill out the pad with extra space. So, it shouldn't be that big of a deal. But it should be big enough it may need an advanced docking computer to get in the slot. Or at least not without a lot of practice. It would come with one to start people out. But yes it would fit snuggly in the mail slot and basically fill out most of the large pad. Take the cutter and fill it out to the width of those side engines and it would work out. Probably be flyable still too.

It should be a little OP. It's very expensive. Maybe the price could be raised more(420m after a 20% Li price reduction. 525M base?). I assume if used in combat it's more of a tank than a damage dealer. Or at least it would be limited to lots of smaller gimbals/turrets or a very odd forward firing setup like the one I proposed.

I dropped the hull from 1100t to 800t. And with it the FSD to 6 from 7 because it drops the potential jump range and speed/maneuverability. That was one of the downsides. It should be less maneuverable but tanky. It should be vulnerable to things like the cutter with speed or weak to things like the corvette with better weapons layout and DPS. It's main function may be to sit there and stop other ships from warping out like a large paper weight. And massive Shield recovery during combat. It could require crew to use cutting down on proffits and making it less desireable without really wanting it. Maybe 1 or 2 NPC crew members need to be on board at all times to fly it.

 

[M00ka]

I admire your enthusiasm for this but I think you are being a little ambitious. Suddenly having a ship that not only doubles the carrying capacity of it's nearest rival but is still on par, or exceeds the rivals in nearly all other aspects is just a little too much. If the tare is reduced to lets say 1024, yeah that would make sense but even then I think it would still be overpowered due to its weapons and shield capabilities. The only way the ship as you described could be feasible (again, in my opinion, please remember that) is if it's handling characteristics makes the T-9 feel like you are flying an Eagle. If this proposed ship is as big as you are suggesting, then it should need a separate solar system just to turn, and then you still need to give it a week's notice of intent.

Again, I admire your work with this, but it needs to have some deficiencies otherwise it will be the ONLY ship everyone owns and I don't think anyone wants ED reduced to a single ship game.

 

[Noobilite]

It could change other things on the ship, but you could remove one or two of the 8 sized optional internals. Then it's max cargo is 1074-1330t with nothing else. And you would be running 928-1184t for the same setup. Not sure what other changes from weight loss would need to occur. But it would be reduced again. I think part of the potential balancing is the fact it only has 7 thrusters and has so much weight. That should help slow it down.

It would probably get another optional slot of smaller size to compensate. Probably a size 3. Or a restricted size 5. And it's thrusters could be reduced to size 6.

I wanted the design to average out near 2500t total though. That is what it does in it's current configuration. And it would cost a lot to operate and buy. The rebuys will average 42-52million just from the ship alone. It wouldn't be cheap. Especially not in open play. I would think it would be a prime target for greifers just because of what it is. And becuase it can be outmaneuvered by almost anything. I think no matter the layout it's basically the ultimate solo ship. Open would be a whole different story. And a potential nightmare.

One thing to balance out combat wise is to place the hardpoints carefully. If it has very big weaknesses on the rear, or has very evened fire per side with turrets, it would be very weak from bad angles. This could make it almost a shoe in to kill for PVP. As is the hardpoint should be mostly in the front and centered for mining.

It's design and smaller sensor should also make it very vulnerable in PVP to good players with longer range and faster setup. It should die easily to anyone with any experience. Hypothetically the larger cargo is the only thing making it worth while. It needs to be able to make up for the potential losses. I gave it double the cargo because it cost double and almost triple a cutter.

And with the gains from combat I assume it's not worth using in combat in any way that is risky without hefty financial backing. And since it's less efficient money wise than the cutter, it's not worth doing things unless you know it's safe. So, it's a high risk, high cost end game ship for soloists. Just like the older games describe it. I think it should have the cargo as it's not really useful in open play because of the efficiency loss from the price. It's should mostly only be good for mining and transport end game and in solo. It can probably be balanced with other miner details.

And, yes, it would be stupid to head on this thing and expect to win. You would have to stay out of it's weapons arch/reach. Especially if it has strong frontal weapons. It should be beatable though. Combat is the only thing it needs to be bad at to balance it. Everything else has better combat abilities. It just has massive defense to balance it's slowness. It has mostly small weapons and much less average DPS than other big ships.

For example, I think it's hardpoints make it only capable of getting 100-150 dps. But it can field more interesting/unique weapon layouts.

I think of it as a space whale. Best to hunt down in packs. Probably safe from single player targets as you can run. But vulnerable to mass attack or player stupidity/ bad luck. Although a good single player could probably hunt you down over long enough space and with good equipment. I wonder how hard this would be to stop interdiction from players. You can balance that with the supercruise speed alone potentially. That would balance it out.

 

[Lestat]

I would think a ship carrier would hold more than double the cutter. I would think it would hold at least 8x the cutter or more.

The point is you can pretty much make one uber ship for end game and goof around. Even if it's not the greatest jump range.

Not sure about that because it doing a lot more than the current large ship setup. Moving a Carrier. So the other type of fuel it carries and the type of Ship FSD drives it uses. Also, it might have a crew. Maybe have larger Hull integrity so it can move the Carrier. I just toss a few things out.

I think your idea you need to take a type 9 and work from that. Don't get carried away. Huge No. Maybe large hardpoints. The ship mainly defence and escape because it will be a miner or cargo haulier. If we take the current type 9 add another 8 Module or 7. I think that would be reasonable. I am more on Module 7 side. Now the Utility mounts way too high. Let keep it around 4 maybe 5.

 

[Noobilite]

I'm going off of the original games designs as a basis. Maybe. The largest weapon in the old game was a large plasma accelerator. Maybe a large instead of a Huge slot. The rest I would keep as it's for mining layouts.

I'm going bigger because I want it to be like the original. It was 2500t. This is 2500t. I think it can work out with the cost. If I take away cargo I have to make it smaller and then have to make it cheaper. It's massive rebuy that makes it as much as a large cutter build should be part of it's downside. It's for the super rich. It's half a billion to buy. If it's smaller and cheaper it doesn't have as much purpose in the game. And that makes it less balance as far as I can tell. It's excess in this case should help balance it and be it's downfall.

But it's definitely a possible idea to drop to the large hardpoint from a huge. That would lower it's combat abilities more. Although it's possible it may need that huge hardpoint just to keep up. If not a large would be better.

Actually, looking at some of the layouts. It doesn't change the DPS at all. It's a matter of style with the weapons. Huge helps get DPS faster while the large allows a few extra hits. Sometimes large alpha strikes. Not sure which is better. Or worse... Large seems to give more leeway. Like it allows a third volley of rail guns in the one setup. Or an actual large plasma accelerator.

With large I could just do large PA's and do all plasma slugs... 8) I like plasma slug builds! Maybe focused L PA with 9 RG's...

Actually, I think the H slot balances out better. It fits the 8A PD best. And it's one lone H point with lots of small ones. Maybe....

Is there a way to simulate ships in ED to see how they work out in practice? Might be fun.

Edit: I just noticed I was wrong about the cargo to price ration. If I remove 1 size 8 internal it would be equal to the cutter at a price of 525 million. So, it probably needs at least one size 8 remove. The rest should be good besides adjusting thrusters and other core internals.

Removed one size 8 optional internal and adjusted the ship. I could remove another and add a size 3 or another size 5 reserved. It would open up more engine options potentially, but that would make it more agile. Unless I could get it down to size 6 thrusters.

The 1440 version is also the least agile amongst them.

BTW. My stats are getting very close to the ones in this video:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2BE2MVEvVE
Thinking about it. The higher the cargo in this the more proffitable trading becomes and gets closer to being in line with mining and exploration.

One massive drawback could be the reduction of hardpoints. Maybe:

H or L
M
M
S
S
S
S

As is the cutter and Type -9 have better jump range per jump. Although the panther clipper would have more overall range from fuel. Unfortunately I don't have enough combat expereince to refine that side well. I sort of went on mining and transport.

 

[Tenshi]

Panther Clipper couldn't dock at stations in the older version of Elite Dangerous. They needed shuttles to move cargo to and fro.

I would like to see the Imperial Fleet carrier with this name to be honest.

 

[Noobilite]

I think the main benefit of this would be to get trade values ups to the same ammount as mining and exploration. You can't really go faster with mining, even if you can carry more cargo, but you can get more transport money from soloing wing missions. This would give pure trade a more equal footing.

It would also give us a 2 billion plus option for void opal minings. But the cutter would still be faster and more agile. It's not actually better than other ships. It's just bigger. Except for in trade. I don't think it would be OP except maybe the weapons layout. Maybe combat if you can get your guns aimed. But that is supposed to be the case. Plus it could be a fun weapon to MLF other ships better than the cutter. It would be the defacto neutral version of the cutter for locking other ship. Especially for group work. That would be more fair as the biggest lock ship is then not bound to a faction or superpower.

And yes, I know how fast a cutter can do wing missions. I'm going them now. But this would give pure trade a credit per hour boost it needs without adjusting trade. Just adding a ship we've all wanted. So, I don't see how it doesn't fit a role. Cutter is still better for void opals and combat. Panther Clipper might be a better strip miner though. Even with cheap things you could pull in some profits with random roids being eaten in seconds. Particularly with the 8A charged PD with 6 small slots for mining lances and 8+ collector limpets. It would be an extreme build, but a good build.

 

[CMDR_A1R]

Every time I see another Panther Clipper thread I am more and more tempted to make a Panther Clipper thread thread. Given how many threads about the Panther Clipper exist, I could probably have some categories in it for suggested configurations, added game mechanics, etc...

Maybe if FDev actually sees how many threads have been made about the Panther Clipper they'll actually stop twiddling their thumbs and add it. Of course, that's assuming that they know how they want the ship to be configured....

NO Fdev are just teasing the community with the thought of the ship, they will already have it developed anyway and holding it back for one of their massive updates to series updates to make it more interesting. Christmas is coming and I for one would love Fdev to drop a nice gift to everybody and include it in the game which is what a lot are waiting for anyway. I dont play it much right now but I will once the new ship is released as long as its not like the t9 or t10 school bus with a massive turning delay. sucks.

 

[CMDR_A1R]

Panther Clipper couldn't dock at stations in the older version of Elite Dangerous. They needed shuttles to move cargo to and fro.

I would like to see the Imperial Fleet carrier with this name to be honest.

Tenshi, you're absolutely right it was auto connect when you got to station through remote but I still loved the ship even with max everything you still had tonnes of storage for cargo missions. Lots of weapons but crew was a little much being 12 crew members before you could launch lol.

 

[MK Regular]

NO Fdev are just teasing the community with the thought of the ship, they will already have it developed anyway and holding it back for one of their massive updates to series updates to make it more interesting. Christmas is coming and I for one would love Fdev to drop a nice gift to everybody and include it in the game which is what a lot are waiting for anyway. I dont play it much right now but I will once the new ship is released as long as its not like the t9 or t10 school bus with a massive turning delay. sucks.

They almost certainly have a 3D model of the Panther Clipper (or at the very least a very rough one that they can add details to), but as far as we know there are no stats for it (yet). If I had to take a guess as to why FDev have not released it yet, it would be because of the community's expectations (or rather memories) of what it should be capable of....

Tenshi, you're absolutely right it was auto connect when you got to station through remote but I still loved the ship even with max everything you still had tonnes of storage for cargo missions. Lots of weapons but crew was a little much being 12 crew members before you could launch lol.

Like you say, the FE2/FFE Panther Clipper could do everything, and was arguably the single "best ship" for any given activity. There is a good chance that a lot of people remember the Panther Clipper this way. However, because of how FE2 and FFE did ship outfitting (you were allocated a total tonnage for your drives, fuel, cargo, and weapons) the Panther Clipper could only be fitted to be the "best ship" for a single task at any given time. If you wanted lots of firepower to instagib pirates, you would need to limit the size of your jump drive and the amount of fuel and cargo you carried. If you wanted to add a larger jump drive to make longer-distance trades, you would need to trade firepower, fuel, or cargo space.

The problem arises when trying to convert these "best ship for x" builds into ED is that you will end up with a ship that is completely min-maxed for a specific task, and having a new model of the Panther Clipper for every FE2/FFE build archetype would result in more copy-paste ships than the community would be able to tolerate. This creates several problems:

1. How many variants does FDev release?
   • Do they release a single ship for a single role and disappoint a lot of people?
   • Do they release two ships for and disappoint a few less people while getting complaints about copy-paste ships?
   • Do they release three (or more) ships for and disappoint a few less people while getting even more complaints about copy-paste ships?
2. Which build archetype(s) do the released ship(s) follow
   • Do they add a flying hardpoint that destroys everything else in combat but has very little shields and cargo space?
   • Do they release a ship that has tons of cargo space and no weapons?
   • Do they release a ship that has insane shields with very little cargo space and a few small weapons
   • Do they release a ship with an oversized FSD but less cargo and weapons?
   • Do they release a ship that attempts to compromise between defences, firepower, cargo, and jump capability?
   • etc...

No matter what option they choose a sizable portion of the playerbase will potentially be disappointed by the final release.

• Players who want a ship that could mount turreted PAs would be upset if they don't get a version several times more firepower than the other ships in the game
• Players who want a ship that could ram planets at relativistic speeds and survive would be upset if they don't get a version that is nigh invincible
• Players who want to be the ultimate space trucker will be upset if it doesn't have significantly more cargo space than an unshielded Cutter
• Players who want a functional ship for hauling large amounts of cargo while still being reasonably well defended would be disapointed if they don't get a ship that has decent cargo space or firepower
• etc...

FDev cannot reasonably cater to ALL of these groups of players as the result would either result in an uber-ship that makes everything else obsolete or a fleet of copy-paste ships that collectively make every other ship in the game obsolete. Just because the Panther Clipper was OP in FE2 and FFE does not give it free license to be OP in ED, too.

Personally, I fall under the category of wanting a functional version of the Panther Clipper that has decent protection, cargo space and firepower as I believe that such a design would be easiest to balance and would still have the potential to satisfy the majority of players. Such a design could easily give the Panther Clipper protection and firepower on-par with the Cutter, Anaconda, Corvette, and Type 10, while still maintaining its title of the "king of traders" and trademark lethargic handling. I have actually theory-crafted such a design (and posted it on the forums a few times), so I know it's entirely possible. However, if FDev were to prove me wrong and figure out another way to add the Panther Clipper that is easier to balance and/or makes more people happy, I really wouldn't complain about getting a new ship (a new ship is a new ship after all).

As for when we'll actually get the Panther Clipper (in whatever form it may take), I suspect that it will only be released when FDev sees that most of the playerbase has lowered their expectations of what the Panther Clipper should be (or that we'll even get it) to the point where more people will be happy about finally getting the Panther Clipper rather than upset about not getting their Panther Clipper.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

I think Frontier would be wise to take any "new ship suggestions" from players and promptly yeet them off a cliff.

 

[CMDR_A1R]

They almost certainly have a 3D model of the Panther Clipper (or at the very least a very rough one that they can add details to), but as far as we know there are no stats for it (yet). If I had to take a guess as to why FDev have not released it yet, it would be because of the community's expectations (or rather memories) of what it should be capable of....

Like you say, the FE2/FFE Panther Clipper could do everything, and was arguably the single "best ship" for any given activity. There is a good chance that a lot of people remember the Panther Clipper this way. However, because of how FE2 and FFE did ship outfitting (you were allocated a total tonnage for your drives, fuel, cargo, and weapons) the Panther Clipper could only be fitted to be the "best ship" for a single task at any given time. If you wanted lots of firepower to instagib pirates, you would need to limit the size of your jump drive and the amount of fuel and cargo you carried. If you wanted to add a larger jump drive to make longer-distance trades, you would need to trade firepower, fuel, or cargo space.

The problem arises when trying to convert these "best ship for x" builds into ED is that you will end up with a ship that is completely min-maxed for a specific task, and having a new model of the Panther Clipper for every FE2/FFE build archetype would result in more copy-paste ships than the community would be able to tolerate. This creates several problems:

1. How many variants does FDev release?
   • Do they release a single ship for a single role and disappoint a lot of people?
   • Do they release two ships for and disappoint a few less people while getting complaints about copy-paste ships?
   • Do they release three (or more) ships for and disappoint a few less people while getting even more complaints about copy-paste ships?
2. Which build archetype(s) do the released ship(s) follow
   • Do they add a flying hardpoint that destroys everything else in combat but has very little shields and cargo space?
   • Do they release a ship that has tons of cargo space and no weapons?
   • Do they release a ship that has insane shields with very little cargo space and a few small weapons
   • Do they release a ship with an oversized FSD but less cargo and weapons?
   • Do they release a ship that attempts to compromise between defences, firepower, cargo, and jump capability?
   • etc...

No matter what option they choose a sizable portion of the playerbase will potentially be disappointed by the final release.

• Players who want a ship that could mount turreted PAs would be upset if they don't get a version several times more firepower than the other ships in the game
• Players who want a ship that could ram planets at relativistic speeds and survive would be upset if they don't get a version that is nigh invincible
• Players who want to be the ultimate space trucker will be upset if it doesn't have significantly more cargo space than an unshielded Cutter
• Players who want a functional ship for hauling large amounts of cargo while still being reasonably well defended would be disapointed if they don't get a ship that has decent cargo space or firepower
• etc...

FDev cannot reasonably cater to ALL of these groups of players as the result would either result in an uber-ship that makes everything else obsolete or a fleet of copy-paste ships that collectively make every other ship in the game obsolete. Just because the Panther Clipper was OP in FE2 and FFE does not give it free license to be OP in ED, too.

Personally, I fall under the category of wanting a functional version of the Panther Clipper that has decent protection, cargo space and firepower as I believe that such a design would be easiest to balance and would still have the potential to satisfy the majority of players. Such a design could easily give the Panther Clipper protection and firepower on-par with the Cutter, Anaconda, Corvette, and Type 10, while still maintaining its title of the "king of traders" and trademark lethargic handling. I have actually theory-crafted such a design (and posted it on the forums a few times), so I know it's entirely possible. However, if FDev were to prove me wrong and figure out another way to add the Panther Clipper that is easier to balance and/or makes more people happy, I really wouldn't complain about getting a new ship (a new ship is a new ship after all).

As for when we'll actually get the Panther Clipper (in whatever form it may take), I suspect that it will only be released when FDev sees that most of the playerbase has lowered their expectations of what the Panther Clipper should be (or that we'll even get it) to the point where more people will be happy about finally getting the Panther Clipper rather than upset about not getting their Panther Clipper.

easiest fix, let the player configure it to their liking and role, like you said its a trade off for different roles but its entirely up to the player what role its for so I dont think it would disappoint, its no different to most other large ships and their roles. Lets face it guys and gals they have brought out a number of ships since talking about bringing out the panther and its still held back even though other ships have been pushed forward so its time it came out.

So for me an equally balanced ship such as the cutter, anaconda, corvette then its up to the player to configure to their own liking but ultimately would carry a lot more cargo for space truckers as well.

"I think Frontier would be wise to take any "new ship suggestions" from players and promptly yeet them off a cliff. "

Its not a new ship suggestion, Fdev suggested it years ago and the modeling is done.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

easiest fix, let the player configure it to their liking and role, like you said its a trade off for different roles but its entirely up to the player what role its for so I dont think it would disappoint, its no different to most other large ships and their roles. Lets face it guys and gals they have brought out a number of ships since talking about bringing out the panther and its still held back even though other ships have been pushed forward so its time it came out.

So for me an equally balanced ship such as the cutter, anaconda, corvette then its up to the player to configure to their own liking but ultimately would carry a lot more cargo for space truckers as well.

"I think Frontier would be wise to take any "new ship suggestions" from players and promptly yeet them off a cliff. "

Its not a new ship suggestion, Fdev suggested it years ago and the modeling is done.

Where is the model?

 

[MK Regular]

Where is the model?

There is a rather basic ship model that was used for an early animation of the docking pad (I'm too lazy to go find it). The model used is supposedly the Panther Clipper, although looking at the shape it could just as easily be the Puma or something else entirely.

I think Frontier would be wise to take any "new ship suggestions" from players and promptly yeet them off a cliff.

Given the quality of most "new ship suggestions" (see my "4 categories of useless player suggestions" in this thread), your recommendation certainly has some merit to it. I still stand by what I said in the other thread though.

 

[Noobilite]

Just realizing this(I think). If min mass is for hull mass and it has 800 hull mass does that mean it can't use the 8Shield category or that it will start to loose efficiency? If it cant' use 8's it could put in a 7 shield and have a really high base shield value that can use 8 shield cell banks to heal it and have values near an 8 shield with the 7 shield generator class. I would prefer around 1440mj shield base with a basic shield or max shield. That could be it's unique ability. Massive lower sized shields. This means it can have an 7 thrusters and 7 PP while still getting 8 level stats. And a 9 slot would reduce the number of 8 slots so it can't have as many cell banks. This adding to the cost if you put in a very large almost 1billion credit fuel scoop. Probably best for combat.

Or is that not correct?! Haven't figured out how to figure out shields generically on a fantasy ship.

NVM, I think it just gets the maximum bonus.

I think the best option is to make it have a 9 size slot and 2 8's with only an option for a cargo and fuel scoop in the 9 and possibly a fuel tank if desired. This makes it unofficially a utility slot because of the absence of equipment. can't use a bigget shield as there is no higher bonus from weight loss. 8 is already max. Then it has the cutters 2 size 8's with a size 8 PD making it unique amongst ships. Then giving it a size 8 PP and maybe a size 8 thruster. This adds weight and cost nerfing it with better equipment. It also makes the utilities more expensive than the cutter and makes the combat build go up to near 2 billion on average with a 9A fuel scoop. Not sure on the cost of a 9 cargo rack.

At minimum the 8 power plant allows the utility builds to have armoured over overcharged for better cooling. Unless that isn't needed. That could be the reason for the very high diamond explorer level cooling. Then maybe keep the engines/PP at 7.

9 size slots:
9A Fuel scoop: approx. 916,265,168 credits, rebuy +45.8132584 million credits(3.17x the 8A), 2.181 per second, Approx. 203 base integrity, and using at least 1.277mw
9E Cargo: 12,447,078, Credits 512 cargo.

Thinking about it. It could be unique in that it has a new 9 sized limpet controller nothing else has.. This would give it more choices between cargo and collection speed for mining.

Limpets:
9A Prospector Limpet: Range: 17,500, Max Limpets: 16, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 360t, Cost: 62,985,600
9A Collector Limpet: Range: 3,000, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.28mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 512t, Cost: 62,985,600
9E Decontamination Limpet: Range: 3280, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.5mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 290t, Cost: 11,809,800
9A Fuel Tranfer Limpet: Range: 3,500, Max Limpets: 16, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600
9A Hatch Breaker Limpet: Active Range: 8,080, Target Range: 7,980, Hack Time: 0s, Max Limpets: 24, Power Draw: 1.26mw, Integrity: 200, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600
9E Recon Limpet: Range: 2,300-2,400, Hack Time: 8s, Max Limpets: 1, Power Draw: 1.5mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 290t, Cost: ?
9A Repair Limpet: Range: 3,500, Repair Capacity: 600, Max Limpets: 5, Power Draw: 1.08mw, Integrity: 232, Weight: 320t, Cost: 62,985,600

That would make this the ultimate fuel rat ship?! And a really good pirate hatch breaker ship. Especially with a size 9 limpet set.