New ship: Panther Clipper

Archvillain

Archvillain
Kira Goto said:
I don't think it should ever need a fuel scoop unless you're covering distances greater than 200+ ly. I'd use the C4 slot for an FSD booster or hull/module reinforcement and maybe stick one of the latter into a C5 slot as well - unless a C6 shield (if it can hold one that size) and engineered HD armor on it is sufficient for any NPC encounter - because I occasionally like to shoot back at those annoying pirates.
Click to expand...
Yeah, except I'd use a C5 for a fighter bay so NPC pirates can be distracted and/or taking damage while the cargo ship is getting ready to leave.
(Fighters are tele-operated so I can just abandon the drone hardware if that's more convenient.)

Leaving pirates behind is my normal MO, but I think dishing out a bit of righteous pain on the way out is more fun :)
 
Last edited:

Nowski

Nowski
Michael Ryan said:
So TWO kind of modules - because size 7 and size 8
But they mentioned about TWO special slots for cargo as well.
Click to expand...

They are talking about the existing slots when they say "but these are special", not about the modules. The link I gave goes right to the section in the livestream.

The implication is quite clear, there's no room for imaginary extra slots.
 

CMDR VitalyNcr

CMDR VitalyNcr
Jinx Chrome said:
Maybe you could ask FDev for the Puma Clipper?
Click to expand...
My point was it's 50% better in cargo capacity than the best large multi-role ship we currently have. I would trade speed and toughness (and even more - weapons) - but for more cargo.
What I personally would beg FDev for is all four big slots being cargo-only special. This shouldn't be a multi-role flying fortress, this should be a damn super cargo ship.

With the original Panther Clipper cargo capacity in mind, I personally hoped for around 1400t unshielded.
 
Last edited:

Doctor Dread

Doctor Dread
Surprize960 said:
Did they say anything about the Utilities? (6 were visible on screen)

Cargospace is fine for me. 10 hardpoints and a fighter bay are great.
Click to expand...

I brought up the fun idea of Tardis type cargo racks and lo and behold, here they are :)

So here's another fun/crazy (crazy for now) idea, modular internals - I don't need 10 hardpoints and a fighter bay, not a single one. FDevs, how about if choose to remove them altogether, I get more Tardis-optimized existing cargo holds?
 

Desirsar

Desirsar
I'll never understand why they don't fill it up with cargo racks on internal test servers, write the number down, and bring it to the stream, "subject to change." Ask me again how I know they don't play their own game...
 

Michael Ryan

Michael Ryan
Nowski said:
They are talking about the existing slots when they say "but these are special", not about the modules. The link I gave goes right to the section in the livestream.

The implication is quite clear, there's no room for imaginary extra slots.
Click to expand...

something special about is not the same as these are specials
and again, they mentioned later about TWO cargo-locked slots

So no, implication isn't quite clear


and it is just a part of my doubts.... even Parnters created videos with different information and they has brief before the Frontier Unlocked.

I just will wait.
 

Shurimal

Shurimal
Well, it carries 20% less than I hoped for. Still, a 33% reduction in round trips for getting that Orbis done and 10 trips to fully fuel my carrier is... good enough, I guess? On a plus side, it looks absolutely amazing. A proper industrial cargo ship.

I guess I'll still get it in early access even if it isn't as in my dreams.txt, maybe the standard version instead of Stellar. And I'll name it Shōganai.
 

Michael Ryan

Michael Ryan
Nowski said:
To you, evidently. Did you listen to the stream at all?
Click to expand...
(Nowski post was edited after my answer)

Twice, and I could ask the same :)

And remember that they did mistakes in the past too... so I will wait for strong information straight from Frontier, because if there is discussion like that that means this wasn't clear, and I can't just choice one interpretation from someone, by random confidence.

And I don't mean you are not right, because maybe you are, but even if probably you are still I need something stronger, because choices like that are totally unintuitive for me.
 
Last edited:

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
CMDR VitalyNcr said:
My point was it's 50% better in cargo capacity than the best large multi-role ship we currently have. I would trade speed and toughness - but for more cargo.
What I personally would beg FDev for is all four big slots being cargo-only special. This shouldn't be a multi-role flying fortress, this should be a damn super cargo ship.
Click to expand...
It has been discussed over and over again that the size of an (unengineered) 8E thruster cannot move more than 3360 tons total mass and therefore, the Panther Clipper would have a maximum laden weight of 3360t. It was pretty much unlikely that FDev would overhaul module sizes because of its ramifications.
The Panther Clipper is a fine ship with its current specs and sits well in the lineup of existing ships. It has 50% more carge space, it can defend itself and about the rest - we're going to see when we have her in our hangars. There has to be some headroom for future ships. PCMkIII?

If players have a problem that the PC doesn't meet their expectations for colonisation purposes, my answer is that it is not the PC's fault but a problem with the design of the game loop (i.e. the "monotony of hauling" - maybe a good name for a ship?) but that belongs into another thread.
 

bilowik

B
Michael Ryan said:
Twice, and I could ask the same :)

And remember that they did mistakes in the past too... so I will wait for strong information straight from Frontier, because if there is discussion like that that means this wasn't clear, and I can't just choice one interpretation from someone, by random confidence.

And I don't mean you are not right, because maybe you are, but even if probably you are still I need something stronger, because choices like that are totally unintuitive for me.
Click to expand...
If those two special slots were "in addition" to the optional internal count they did prior, we'd be nearly double the Cutter capacity, yet they stated "about 50% more cargo space", and "about 50%" is in line with those two specialized slots being included in the original internal count, of 2x8 and 2x7.
 

CMDR VitalyNcr

CMDR VitalyNcr
Jinx Chrome said:
It has been discussed over and over again that the size of an (unengineered) 8E thruster cannot move more than 3360 tons total mass and therefore, the Panther Clipper would have a maximum laden weight of 3360t. It was pretty much unlikely that FDev would overhaul module sizes because of its ramifications.
The Panther Clipper is a fine ship with its current specs and sits well in the lineup of existing ships. It has 50% more carge space, it can defend itself and about the rest - we're going to see when we have her in our hangars. There has to be some headroom for future ships. PCMkIII?

If players have a problem that the PC doesn't meet their expectations for colonisation purposes, my answer is that it is not the PC's fault but a problem with the design of the game loop (i.e. the "monotony of hauling" - maybe a good name for a ship?) but that belongs into another thread.
Click to expand...
Currently you can build a ship that cannot fly because of undersized thrusters. So there's no hard constraints and I don't see a problem in that. Install better thrusters if you want to install improved cargo racks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom