Been alot of talk on this subject lately. The trade system seems a bit screwy to me. Where you have alot of trade traffic, the prices should converge. Where you do not have anyone trading a good the price should keep dropping at the selling station, and rising at the buying station, and also be factored with supply and demand respectively. whilst this does seem to happen, it also seems to only happen in a restricted bandwith, at my estimation at about 5% of the average price of the good at the respective station.
Also with trading......most cargo transportation is via consignment IRL. Very little speculative trade is done by cargo carriers in the real world, mostly because the cost of filling a container ship is astronomical and the risk can easily put a cargo carrier out of business on one bad trade. However, in the current system prices need to be much more dynamic in areas where there is little cargo services, and far flatter where there is an abundance.
Ship prices: this is a difficult area mostly because of the outfitting system in use. Both combat and cargo ships have access to the same equipment, it is all kinda odd. IRL cargo ships are by far the "cheapest" they are basicly big boxes with an engine at one end, and a point bit at the other. The overwhelming desire is maximum cargo at maximum efficiency in with regard paid to timely delivery. You just cannot turn a tanker into a battleship.
Military ships however have huge range, are as fast as practicable, have enormous crews, and a far more agile than thier cargo counterparts, not to mention incredibly expensive to build AND run. However, in a bounty type economy prices paid for this kind of service so reflect the costs and risks of doing business. These guys unsupported operational time is measure in years, not months like it is for cargo vessels.
Scouting vessels historically similar to cargo vessels except they sacrifice cargo for speed, extended operating time and sensors, navigational\scientific equipment and labs, they are able to defend themselves but cannot stand up to military ships of the same class.
Multirole ships are a special class. Able to perform any of the duties of the above ships, but unable to do them as effectively. This is where most of the problem lie in our current structure. The Adder, cobra, ASP,imp clipper and python are all the best traders in their class. They have also been the bast scouts in their class, except for the python cobra and clipper (although the cobra is no slouch) and have been the best combat vessels in their class. Part of this is lack of ships, part of this is no dedicated scout vessels. The addition of the vulture and the FDL changes this a little however, but as they ARE combat vessels they SHOULD be far more dangerous than other vessels of similar tonnage and also be far more expensive,
The other strange thing I have noticed is combat ships having power problems. A foolish thing to have on a combat ship. Power difficulties should not happen for these vessels. If power is going to be part of a design, it should be a minor problem for multirole and scout vessels when in combat, and perhaps a major problem for cargo vessels
So to balance the ships I would suggest the following: the cargo capacity of the hauler, type 6 and type 7 should be increased, thier jump range reduced to such a lvl that any further reduction will impact on efficiency. Greater jump engines are allowed, but at a cost of cargo and a big price jump and the same for extra power to supply the longer jump range.
Combat ships should not have power problems, and should have jump ranges second only to dedicated scout vessels. They should also be very expensive and high running cost.
The ASP and ADDER should have thier cargo capacity reduced, as well as perhaps their power, but should maintain slots for the mounting of various equipment. In other words reduce thier trading and combat viability without sacrificing their scouting ability...make them dedicated scouts, not multirole ships.
The imp clipper seems to be well balanced now as it is in the same class as FDL for combat and type 9 for cargo capacity being a L size ship...just needs the sound back the way it was IMO. The type 9 is simply too expensive following the above reasoning, and perhaps the IMP clipper is too cheap.....dunno, it is more expensive than the type 7, but could probably stand its cost moving out to 30 million or so.
The python is the real problem, its the ship with an identity crises. Its is listed as a multi role ship so I would increase its speed and jump range, reduce its cargo and firepower. It should be out classed by the asp, FDL and Type 7 significantly in thier respective roles as scout combat and trader, but be able to hold its own in all these areas, not excel.
Also with trading......most cargo transportation is via consignment IRL. Very little speculative trade is done by cargo carriers in the real world, mostly because the cost of filling a container ship is astronomical and the risk can easily put a cargo carrier out of business on one bad trade. However, in the current system prices need to be much more dynamic in areas where there is little cargo services, and far flatter where there is an abundance.
Ship prices: this is a difficult area mostly because of the outfitting system in use. Both combat and cargo ships have access to the same equipment, it is all kinda odd. IRL cargo ships are by far the "cheapest" they are basicly big boxes with an engine at one end, and a point bit at the other. The overwhelming desire is maximum cargo at maximum efficiency in with regard paid to timely delivery. You just cannot turn a tanker into a battleship.
Military ships however have huge range, are as fast as practicable, have enormous crews, and a far more agile than thier cargo counterparts, not to mention incredibly expensive to build AND run. However, in a bounty type economy prices paid for this kind of service so reflect the costs and risks of doing business. These guys unsupported operational time is measure in years, not months like it is for cargo vessels.
Scouting vessels historically similar to cargo vessels except they sacrifice cargo for speed, extended operating time and sensors, navigational\scientific equipment and labs, they are able to defend themselves but cannot stand up to military ships of the same class.
Multirole ships are a special class. Able to perform any of the duties of the above ships, but unable to do them as effectively. This is where most of the problem lie in our current structure. The Adder, cobra, ASP,imp clipper and python are all the best traders in their class. They have also been the bast scouts in their class, except for the python cobra and clipper (although the cobra is no slouch) and have been the best combat vessels in their class. Part of this is lack of ships, part of this is no dedicated scout vessels. The addition of the vulture and the FDL changes this a little however, but as they ARE combat vessels they SHOULD be far more dangerous than other vessels of similar tonnage and also be far more expensive,
The other strange thing I have noticed is combat ships having power problems. A foolish thing to have on a combat ship. Power difficulties should not happen for these vessels. If power is going to be part of a design, it should be a minor problem for multirole and scout vessels when in combat, and perhaps a major problem for cargo vessels
So to balance the ships I would suggest the following: the cargo capacity of the hauler, type 6 and type 7 should be increased, thier jump range reduced to such a lvl that any further reduction will impact on efficiency. Greater jump engines are allowed, but at a cost of cargo and a big price jump and the same for extra power to supply the longer jump range.
Combat ships should not have power problems, and should have jump ranges second only to dedicated scout vessels. They should also be very expensive and high running cost.
The ASP and ADDER should have thier cargo capacity reduced, as well as perhaps their power, but should maintain slots for the mounting of various equipment. In other words reduce thier trading and combat viability without sacrificing their scouting ability...make them dedicated scouts, not multirole ships.
The imp clipper seems to be well balanced now as it is in the same class as FDL for combat and type 9 for cargo capacity being a L size ship...just needs the sound back the way it was IMO. The type 9 is simply too expensive following the above reasoning, and perhaps the IMP clipper is too cheap.....dunno, it is more expensive than the type 7, but could probably stand its cost moving out to 30 million or so.
The python is the real problem, its the ship with an identity crises. Its is listed as a multi role ship so I would increase its speed and jump range, reduce its cargo and firepower. It should be out classed by the asp, FDL and Type 7 significantly in thier respective roles as scout combat and trader, but be able to hold its own in all these areas, not excel.
