ASP

[RainbowSix]

I'm currently running about in a type 6, and am looking at the ASP, but for the cost, it needs, IMHO to have a subtle bump in its capacity ~150/160t would be about right.

 

[Ortikon]

It is a multi-purpose, so you would be getting either about the same as a type-6 or less if fitted to not explode.
I love the Asp as I can do moderate trade whilst bounty-hunting and making massive jumps.

 

[GerminVermin]

Capacity? You mean cargo capacity? It already runs just over 100 with no shields and has excellent jump capability. It's not meant as a hauler. If it could run as a hauler, for the price, there would be no reason to buy the Type 7.

The ASP has SIX GUNS and you want it to be even more OP? Haha.

 

[Seboss]

Yup, the Asp is supposed to be multi-role and it's a pretty good one at that. It should not step on specialized trading ships toes.
I would argue that we miss an additional trading ship in the 5~6 millions cr range however. It's a big step from the Type 6 to the Type 7.

 

[GerminVermin]

Yup, the Asp is supposed to be multi-role and it's a pretty good one at that. It should not step on specialized trading ships toes.
I would argue that we miss an additional trading ship in the 5~6 millions cr range however. It's a big step from the Type 6 to the Type 7.

If that is fixed, then they'd have to create 2 or even 3 cargo ships between the Type 7 and the Type 9.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the gaps between these ships. I'm in a Type 7 now and a wingman of mine is very nearly in a Type 9.

I like that there's a big enough gap between them that you're forced to make a LOT of trade runs in whatever ship you have before you can earn the next step up.

 

[Seboss]

I don't really mind the gap myself, and money is plentiful for traders anyway. Older Elite games had a smoother ship progression though, so I wouldn't be surprised if an hypothetic Lion or Tiger fills the gap between the Type 6 and 7 in the future.

 

[Yachats]

Hauler -> Type 6
Cobra -> Asp

The Asp has around the same maybe a bit less capacity but it also doesn't fly like an interstellar bovine.

 

[RainbowSix]

Yup, the Asp is supposed to be multi-role and it's a pretty good one at that. It should not step on specialized trading ships toes.
I would argue that we miss an additional trading ship in the 5~6 millions cr range however. It's a big step from the Type 6 to the Type 7.

Maybe thats what I'm getting at then. Maybe a larger trade ship before the Type 7?

 

[Akelig von Trashcan]

If that is fixed, then they'd have to create 2 or even 3 cargo ships between the Type 7 and the Type 9.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the gaps between these ships. I'm in a Type 7 now and a wingman of mine is very nearly in a Type 9.

I like that there's a big enough gap between them that you're forced to make a LOT of trade runs in whatever ship you have before you can earn the next step up.

I think we don't need more ships but something like an upgrade module that puts more defensive turrets on the back/top of the type 6. Like a ww2 flying fortress. The upgrades should also be visible on the outside and heavily influence your agility. That might create more balance: Un-upgraded cheap eagle's would have to think twice before attacking one, and for the better one's it's a challange for both. I don't think we need silly easy targets anywhere. Everything should come with a certain risk, even attacking a cargo ship.

 

[GerminVermin]

I think we don't need more ships but something like an upgrade module that puts more defensive turrets on the back/top of the type 6. Like a ww2 flying fortress. The upgrades should also be visible on the outside and heavily influence your agility. That might create more balance: Un-upgraded cheap eagle's would have to think twice before attacking one, and for the better one's it's a challange for both. I don't think we need silly easy targets anywhere. Everything should come with a certain risk, even attacking a cargo ship.

If a ship could carry 120 cargo AND be viable in combat, why would anyone fly anything else at that price point?

There MUST be drawbacks for flying the ship you fly. A hauler has maneuver and firepower drawbacks in exchange for great cargo. A fighter has fuel tank and jump range and cargo capacity drawbacks in exchange for combat viability. The jack of all trade ships like the Sidewinder, Cobra, and Asp are kinda good at each career choice but not great at any of them.

It's balanced.

Giving a hauler the ability to defend itself well is just breaking the balance for no reason. It's reducing the risk in the risk-vs-reward system that the current balance presents.

 

[Urbanski101]

If a ship could carry 120 cargo AND be viable in combat, why would anyone fly anything else at that price point?

There MUST be drawbacks for flying the ship you fly. A hauler has maneuver and firepower drawbacks in exchange for great cargo. A fighter has fuel tank and jump range and cargo capacity drawbacks in exchange for combat viability. The jack of all trade ships like the Sidewinder, Cobra, and Asp are kinda good at each career choice but not great at any of them.

It's balanced.

Giving a hauler the ability to defend itself well is just breaking the balance for no reason. It's reducing the risk in the risk-vs-reward system that the current balance presents.

whilst I'm all for modifying ships and adding real depth to that part of the game, I'm kinda with GerminVermin on this one - a cargo ship should be vulnerable considering it's role, if you want more protection, get some friends to fly in convoy or as wingmen.