Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 52

Thread: What is on your TRADING wish list?

  1. #31
    Originally Posted by Aussiedroid View Post (Source)
    "Sell All" button would be nice.
    Agree with that one.

  2. #32
    Agree with the "sell all" idea.

    I'd like it if the current marketing data was correct. You see station X exports a commodity to station Y so you go to station X only they don't have that commodity. That doesn't make sense to me.

  3. #33
    Originally Posted by AndyJ View Post (Source)
    The Panther Clipper is meant to be massive.
    If that dark area at the front is the cockpit, then that is a tiddler - smaller than a T9 even?
    Indeed, the panther needs to be well over 1000 cargo and made of impenetranium.

  4. #34
    Originally Posted by IndigoWyrd View Post (Source)
    Actual freighters.

    Let's look at the Emma Maersk:
    Length overall (LOA) 1302' 6" (397 m)
    Beam 183' 8" (56 m)
    Gross 170,974 bt
    Cargo capacity 15,000 TEU (1 TEU = 20 ft container)
    Net 55,396 nt
    Deadweight (DWT) 156,907 DWT
    Power 80,080 kW (109,000 hp) Engine: Wartsila 14RT-Flex96c plus 40,000 hp from five Caterpillar 8M32
    Speed more than 25.5 knots, Cruise Speed - 31 mi/h
    Crew The ship has accommodation for 30 people, though the normal crew is only 13.
    First Trip Sept. 08, 2006
    Construction cost US $145,000,000+
    Country of origin Denmark

    Let's compare that to some of our ships:
    Ship Dimensions (in metres)
    Ship Length Width Height
    Adder 31.5 28.8 9.6
    Anaconda 152.4 61.8 31.0
    Asp 56.5 51.3 19.7
    Cobra 27.1 44.0 7.9
    Eagle 31.2 29.7 7.1
    Federal Dropship 73.9 52.3 21.7
    Fer de Lance 73.6 51.6 15.4
    Hauler 28.6 26.2 10.4
    Imperial Clipper 106.7 103.7 24.8
    Lakon Type 6 48.4 27.2 15.0
    Lakon Type 7 81.6 56.1 25.4
    Lakon Type 9 Heavy 117.4 115.3 33.2
    Orca 130.4 50.8 22.7
    Python 87.9 58.1 18.0

    Now to be fair, the Emma Maersk is considered a "super-freighter" but we're not even anywhere close to matching the capacity - The maximum gross mass for dry cargo TEU is 52,910 lb: 47,770 lb (net load) + 5,140 lb (empty container weight). A 400-ton capacity Type-9 is barely over 15 TEU. Even the beloved Imperial Cutter at 700 tons is just a bit over 26 TEU. That 's NOT freight. That's Fed-Ex.
    The Emma Maersk would have an Elite Cargo Capacity of 793,650,000 tons. Now THAT's freight.

    Now clearly that much cargo would just be ridiculous - I've seen CG's complete with far less total contribution, but a good middle ground would be fantastic. I fear even the Panther Clipper will feel like a tandem box-truck in comparison to what cargo ships hold.

    Even the Edmond Fitzgerald held 39,632 ton of cargo when she sank.

    • 729 ft (222 m)
    • 711 ft (217 m)
    Beam: 75 ft (23 m)
    Draft: 25 ft (7.6 m) typical
    Depth: 39 ft (12 m)

    Something to the tune of 2000 - 5000 tons of cargo would finally feel like an actual Freighter. I'm sure someone can figure out how to cram that into half the dimensions of the Edmond Fitzgerald, so it can fit on a large pad.
    MEGA ships in the game would be awesome, huge freighters that could carry a huge amount of cargo. However they would need their own mechanics outside the one we got now, and they should not be usable for CG at all.

    We should hire a crew to operate them NPC or PC, and they should be able to jump far right out of the box.

  5. #35
    Has anyone mentioned cheese yet?

  6. #36
    Trading computer (TC) idea is great. Truth be told, EDDB incorporated into ED but with data from places you visited only. When i visit a station I can already see all the actial prices of goods. TC can scan the board and store the data. Next station I'm in, another scan and store. And I can already compare those two boards. With more stations my net grows and I can identify profitable trade routes.

    This is how I imagine trading.

    Another thing is: Real Trading
    Current system is like this: here's a cargo, this is your destination, we pay this amount and this is your deadline. Agree or .
    My wish list: Mission giver has a cargo and a destination and payment thresholds you can actually negotiate. The higher your rep with a faction, the higher your credibility (successful/failed deliveries ratio), the better your ship (larger cargo, faster and more jump range), the higher chances you hit the higher payment threshold. Exact threshold criteria would be hidden for players and would shift within a little tolerance. And you would pick your delivery deadline from 3-5 proposed - the shorter time picked, the better payment.

    5t contract to deliver Clothes over 72 LY.
    - 2.000 cr for the job with a 12 LY cheap ship with small cargo bay (fine for failure: 3x price for 5t of Clothes )
    - 2.500 cr for the job with a 12 LY cheap but armed ship with small cargo bay (fine for failure: 3x price for 5t of Clothes )
    - 4.000 cr for the job with a 25 LY medium ship (fine for failure: 2x price for 5t of Clothes )
    - 8.000 cr for the job in secured ship with high credibility (fine for failure: 1x price of 5t of Clothes )
    - 25.000 cr for the job in top ship (40 LY range), high credibility and allied status (no fine on failure)

    Additional % of contract if delivered within:
    - 15 minutes, +50%
    - 30 minutes, +20%
    - 60 minutes, +5%

    Ofc, all values are for example purpose.

    This way trading would be more entertaining. You could have real impact on how much you earn and you would earn based on your skill and equipment. This system would encourage upgrading your ships, keeping them at best. Having good ship, rep and what not would translate directly into payment. Same mission, 2 CMDRS, various outcomes. Like IRL - those with rep earn more and can dictate their own prices. Those small fries must accept what is given.

  7. #37
    Originally Posted by AndyJ View Post (Source)

    What I'd like to have - The ability to plot and save routes between trading systems that are easily accessed to set the nav computer for outward and return journeys.
    Could be useful, but I remember that supply and demand changes. I'd have no use for this, as I find routes one day may be profitable, but tomorrow i'd be selling at a loss. Granted some routes come full circle and become profitable again, but I just use bookmarks for that and put in my own notes on the bookmarks.

  8. #38
    With the addition of Squadrons, I'd like the ability to create a bulk freighter owned by the squadron. Park it outside a station and fill up fifty thousand tons of goods, fly to the sell point and offload it. It will onload and offload slowly and automatically, but players can facilitate by making quick roundtrip cargo runs to speed up the process. It's not the most engaging gameplay, but it would be one way to create a player-driven trade group with existing and announced mechanics.

  9. #39
    Do away with the expiring trade data on visited systems. It seems an unnecessary barrier for people who want to have a trading career. I agree that trading data has to be initially acquired by visiting the system or buying access to the trade data from galmap (though, even that could be debated), but once acquired it should be updated automatically. This is 3302 not 1789. An in-ship UI with the ability to browse all markets (that have been visited or acquired) with up to date pricing information and the ability to remotely purchase would be ideal. Still requires going to the actual station to pick up your purchase, of course.

    To make a nod to in-game lore I'd suggest that you have to be in a system with a nav beacon present in order to receive updates to market prices from remote systems. The network of nav beacons could be the "holonet" or communications matrix for the civilized galaxy. Could lead to other interesting gameplay, such as the BGS being able to impact whether the nav beacon can share data. For example a system in LockDown state might mean that that nav beacon no longer shares market data remotely. A system in War might change the nav beacon to Compromised status. etc. Anyway just some thoughts.

  10. #40
    I sailed with Mearsk Not the Emma though but over 200 m was no exception.
    @IndigoWyrd can you calculate what thrusters we need to get the Emma Mearsk airborne?

  11. #41
    Originally Posted by dree View Post (Source)
    I sailed with Mearsk Not the Emma though but over 200 m was no exception.
    @IndigoWyrd can you calculate what thrusters we need to get the Emma Mearsk airborne?
    I think your in the wrong thread, my man. That should be a PM or something. I see what post your are referenceing, but has nothing to with the discussion.

  12. #42
    Sorry for reacting a post in this discussion mr moderator.

    Oops, doing it again

  13. #43
    Originally Posted by dree View Post (Source)
    Sorry for reacting a post in this discussion mr moderator.

    Oops, doing it again
    Well, you also didn't reply with quote, so initially its very confusing of what the heck you were referencing. But I'm not a moderator, and this thread seems dead anyway. react away.

  14. #44
    Originally Posted by 777Driver View Post (Source)
    Only reason I use trade tools is for fetch missions. Everything else for system state trading is already in-game. Oculus Dash will also allow you to display apps/web pages whilst on the bridge in VR

    Nice ideas though
    Same - II only use trade tools for those difficult to find commodities for fetch missions. Otherwise I just free-trade using states and economies. I rarely take a loss on cargo. Then again, I only ever free trade when I'm cargo mission running, so it's not about maxing profit as much as it is about gravy.

  15. #45
    Couple things, but at the top of the list:

    Human Bubble - Thargoid Bubble Trading

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast