Proposal Discussion cargo mass cs cargo volume

[Skybert]

Currently, only the cargo's mass is used in the game, which is fine when dealing with hyperspace jump distances. But when it comes to transporting stuff in a cramped container, volume (e.g. cubic meters) is also very important (see car when going on vacation).
When you take for example gold, a cubic meter weighs approximately 19 tons or a ton is just some 52 liters. When you transport 4 tons of gold with your puny sidewinder you are just using only 5% of the volume of your cargo bay (assuming it has a volume of 4 cubic meters). I think being able to continue to add more cargo until you fill up the volume would add some good complexity (*) to the game.


-----
* complexity:
Let's just define complexity very simply as "doing something". It doesn't matter how stupid "doing something" is, only how much of it you're doing. So, bad complexity is when you're doing more whithout getting anything out of it, e.g. like docking at a station to find out that there are no appropriate missions on the bulletin board (why couldn't i read the missions from outside the station; i can still dock if i have to transport some cargo). Then, good complexity is when i do more, but also get something in return. So, when i spend more time to find the perfect cargo load, i get a higher profit in return.

 

[Yaffle]

I think the best way to look at them is that for simplicity of gameplay each cargo can is classed as a tonne.

It's similar to an intermodal container used in shipping, but as well as standardised dimensions it also has a standardised mass. For heavy stuff, like gold, imagine lots of bubble wrap around a small payload. For light stuff, like hydrogen, lots of complicated compression and safety equipment.

So, yes, that's very handwavey, but if we are to worry about the density of all cargo before flying as well as fuel and other things it makes it all far too complicated for words.

 

[Half Giant]

Standardised containers result in amazing load/off load times. It's probably a fair trade off. The original had trading in other weights, was it kilograms of gold? Which meant they effectively took up no space and that was quite nice as I always got some when I saw a low price but never sold until I saw a record price weeks later. In my mind it was just a small box, next to my pilots seat, that I kept my gold in. Unless I dreamed that.

 

[Yaffle]

Standardised containers result in amazing load/off load times. It's probably a fair trade off. The original had trading in other weights, was it kilograms of gold? Which meant they effectively took up no space and that was quite nice as I always got some when I saw a low price but never sold until I saw a record price weeks later. In my mind it was just a small box, next to my pilots seat, that I kept my gold in. Unless I dreamed that.

Re: original, yes gemstones and some precious metals were sold by the kg or g and were kept in a safe in the cabin. So you could have your 35(?) payload and any number of kg of gold in a mysterious cabin safe.