Quite a few T-7 pilots might not agree.
Make the Type 7 a medium ship
- Thread starter Cohen the Worrior
- Start date
Why? If pythun can fit and can have near the amount, why?
Because...
A) The Python has different dimensions.
B) The Python is a different shape.
C) The internal volume of The Python is different.
D) The Python is a different ship.
pick one... it doesn't matter which one... they all work.
Who cares? I mean, how much time does one actually spend in the T-7, anyways? Takes a few hours max of trading in a T-7 until one can afford a fully geared up T-9.
The T-7 was one of the few ships I actually sold, once it completed its task, which was basically making enough money to afford a better ship. I don't think making it fit onto a medium pad would have made any difference.
The T-7 was one of the few ships I actually sold, once it completed its task, which was basically making enough money to afford a better ship. I don't think making it fit onto a medium pad would have made any difference.
Last edited:
The point is moot. FD is not going to change these ships for the minority.
You think they would object against being able to land at outposts?
I find that quite hard to believe.
You are not speaking for the majority.
Trust me, you're not.
No, none of them works. A mid sized trader, square box, should have a larger cargo hold than a mid sized multi role ship.
Thanks for proving our point that the T-7 needs a buff.
Before earning credits was so easy, the T7 was a good stepping stone to the python or t9 as it was so much cheaper.
I would like an entire balance pass over the entirety of ships including costs, availability and so on but it's not going to happen anytime soon.
Being able to land at outposts isn't such a great advantage these days as it's not like the prices are so much better there.
I would like an entire balance pass over the entirety of ships including costs, availability and so on but it's not going to happen anytime soon.
Being able to land at outposts isn't such a great advantage these days as it's not like the prices are so much better there.
Making the T7 medium would still not require it to be more expensive than the Python. Yes, it can carry more, but it still can't defend itself nearly as good, and it doesn't fit into as many roles as the Python either. That won't change, even if FD enable the 5th small hardpoint on the T7 (which they should).
Every time the T-7 and mediumedium pads are brought up everyone piles the Clipper and Orca into the thread...
The Clipper is slightly thinner than a T-9, so can't fit width ways.
The Orca is about 41m longer than the Python or 22/25m shorter than the Anaconda/Corvette, so can't fit length ways.
They'd both need significant redesigns to fit on a medium pad and I'd bet the ARKs I don't have (since I bought several paintjobs for them, as is,) that FD will never make such drastic changes to either one.
Comparatively, the T-7 is less than a single meter taller than the FGS, so all FD would actually need to do to fit it on a medium pad is have the landing gear retract slightly when docking and make the necessary adjustments to the outfitting camera.
The Clipper is slightly thinner than a T-9, so can't fit width ways.
The Orca is about 41m longer than the Python or 22/25m shorter than the Anaconda/Corvette, so can't fit length ways.
They'd both need significant redesigns to fit on a medium pad and I'd bet the ARKs I don't have (since I bought several paintjobs for them, as is,) that FD will never make such drastic changes to either one.
Comparatively, the T-7 is less than a single meter taller than the FGS, so all FD would actually need to do to fit it on a medium pad is have the landing gear retract slightly when docking and make the necessary adjustments to the outfitting camera.
These T7 medium requests are part of a greater whole.
Ship type and what it fits (and doesn't) should be gameplay orientated.
All ships should be viable to certain degrees for aspects of gameplay.
It seems to me, that instead of thinking up gameplay and activities first, ships came first and then have been shoe horned into what gameplay we have.
For example, bulk trading and combat are at two ends of the spectrum so a ship should be good at one and terrible at the other.
Or, with multiple role ships "OK" at everything, but not better than a specialist.
Even small ships should be good for something like the non-existent smuggling or piracy or stealth.
Fixes might include doubling cargo size for modules in "specialist traders" like the Hauler, T6, T7 and T9 compared to multirole ships.
Ultimately the gameplay principle should come first.
Ship type and what it fits (and doesn't) should be gameplay orientated.
All ships should be viable to certain degrees for aspects of gameplay.
It seems to me, that instead of thinking up gameplay and activities first, ships came first and then have been shoe horned into what gameplay we have.
For example, bulk trading and combat are at two ends of the spectrum so a ship should be good at one and terrible at the other.
Or, with multiple role ships "OK" at everything, but not better than a specialist.
Even small ships should be good for something like the non-existent smuggling or piracy or stealth.
Fixes might include doubling cargo size for modules in "specialist traders" like the Hauler, T6, T7 and T9 compared to multirole ships.
Ultimately the gameplay principle should come first.
Clipper is an easy fix. It needs retractable nacelles like the original had.
"Easy" as in major ship redesign?
Not so much of a redesign. The segmented wings already look as if they can slide to become more compact, just needs the actual animation. The bigger problem would be some parts of the ship kit, which would need to follow that motion.
Ah OK, so just need to hit the "do animation" button and we're good
I don't say that it isn't some substantial work to make it function, but the design of the ship would not have to change much.Ah OK, so just need to hit the "do animation" button and we're good
T7, Clipper and Orca should all have been medium pad capable from the beginning IMO. What ship manufacturer would really leave a competitor free to dominate a niche in the way the Python does at outposts.
Robigo mines passenger runs would be significantly more interesting with a mix of Clippers, Pythons and Orcas for instance
Robigo mines passenger runs would be significantly more interesting with a mix of Clippers, Pythons and Orcas for instance
They all work because they are all categorically and provably true.
FDev thought otherwise. Probably in the interest of providing a range of different ships to fly with a range of different capabilities. Which should lead to a variety of different gameplay options.
The credit cost difference between the Type 7 and the Python indicates this but now means next to nothing because FDev didn't care enough about its games economy.