Federal dropship Hull Mass

[Surround]

rep for op. I have wondered those same things.

I would take 1 internal slot from clipper and give it to type-7. That is just so unlogical that tiny clipper has more cargo than a bigger dedicated trader type-7.

And for the FD, I´m fine that it seems worse than clipper. But FD is so much more beautiful than clippy. Mayber later when you can protect your powerplant better, the FD will shine.

 

[Star-Hunter]

Part of it must be the cost, an FD is sub 20 mil and a Conda is almost 150 mil for "similar" class ships,.....so for the FD add more pig iron plate and for the Conda some exotic super armor.

This might be true actually, but still the difference is staggering. Its like using Concrete vs Kevlar-composite. It "Feels" too much for a supposedly military spaceship.

 

[Star-Hunter]

Dropship is designed to carry personel. Life support and living quarters for many people is heavy and takes up internal space. In addition, she is a low budget ship, for her size. That means cheaper, heavier, weaker materials.

....This also explains why Python is more compact than a T7 - the T7 costs nothing to repair because she is made of heavy, cheap materials, powered by over-large low quality engines. Also, the T7 is designed poorly, too high for a medium pad. Maybe pad sizes only came in small and large when the T7 was designed, or maybe the engineers at Lakon were having an off day

the problem is that living quarters and troop transport units will come as additional internal components, that means that the FD is not fitted with them YET.

also, the T7 is nothing BUT cargo space + thrusters, so claiming it is badly designed cargo bay is just unreasonable. Its the quintessential cargoship, it should be bad at everything (as is) BUT CARGO SPACE. Its the only aspect of the ship that matters. But as it stands now (Compared to the pythons internal space / cargo capacity) half the T7s hull is unusable.
The Python might be longer and wider, but it is also very thin and has multiple additional systems + armor.

This is not the issue of game balance vs credits, but internal space.

- - - Updated - - -

rep for op. I have wondered those same things.

I would take 1 internal slot from clipper and give it to type-7. That is just so unlogical that tiny clipper has more cargo than a bigger dedicated trader type-7.

And for the FD, I´m fine that it seems worse than clipper. But FD is so much more beautiful than clippy. Mayber later when you can protect your powerplant better, the FD will shine.

To be fair. Before you rep me, pls read the post again or check yours, because you are comparing the wrong ships.

 

[Ben Ryder]

Price. Better quality components.

- - - Updated - - -

Thinking tug boat compared to a speed boat

 

[clemdha]

And the 35T Imp. Courier has an armor of 144...

 

[Troa Barton]

Lighter stronger more expensive materials, plus all that armor. The federal dropship has the second most armor in the game. If armor tanking becomes a thing the dropship is going to be one mean ship.

 

[Poy]

The drop ship doesn't even have superior armor...your right it does seem odd...perhaps it is considered a trade in material quality for the price? IDK, I'm grasping at straws

Compared to a Clipper, the Python does appear to have more usable space. A big empty wedge versus the tighter lines and curves of the clipper.

To come back to this, the Dropship is probably a cheaply mass built military ship while the Anaconda would be built with lightweight materials etc., justifying its price (and mass)

Regarding the Clipper, it is so large that there is actually a lot of room IN the wings that are probably not taken into account when comparing it to the Python. Also the latter is much flatter.