New Ship Types - What Holes Need To Be Filled?

[Acen ONYX]

Agreed -- sot of..

I think the mid-range (price-wise) non faction-locked is the most lacking. There's a T7 aaaaaand.... That's it.

I disagree though that new ships necessarily need to fill "holes". I want choice, and to me, that's multiple ships to choose from for the same "hole". If it's just one clear winner per role per pricepoint, that's extremely dull.

Corlas,

I'm on-page with you about having more ships / more choice "per tier" or role (hence also my suggestion elsewhere of resurrecting the Saker 3, though I'd bet it's a Marmite type of ship... I like the Saker, but I hate marmite..)

.. but price point shouldn't really be the basis of comparison, since different ships have different base designs, functionality, etc..
It's "convenient" that certain ships are similar enough in price AND function (etc) to be compared, but where a Ford and a Mercedes Benz are approx the same "size", can carry roughly the same number of passengers and/or luggage, and both go at reasonably similar speeds, but the Benz is much more expensive due not only to Brand Name, but materials used inside. In-game, we see the Gutamaya cockpits are quite expensively appointed, befitting the opulence associated with the Imperial "royalty"... versus rank-and-file utilitarian functionality as seen even in the Sidewinder cockpit from Faulcon deLacy.


As far as OP, and "what (ship) holes need to be filled?", I'd agree (elsewhere) that the Python could do with an "opposite number", for example.

IMHO, there's scope for a "planetary lander" type small craft, e.g. its primary purpose is to transport passengers and/or cargo between LARGE vessels and Planetary Bases; perhaps an "outpost shuttle" type small craft, for similar function at Outposts and Orbital Platforms where Large ships cannot dock.....

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

it does not only need more ships for different roles and specialisations....

the most important factor for me, is "esthetics", and for that, there are lot of "holes" to be filled.

 

[Dibiase]

Another medium pad ship like the Python. Right now the python is my favorite ship so I'd be nice to have an alternative. I have other ships but I always go back to the Python because of it's versatility and medium size.

 

[Darkslayer]

You know what? None of this matters because I am just gonna fly my Viper Mk4 95% of the time anyway.

 

[Ca$hback]

When we used to design custom ships for Battlefleet Gothic we'd put our designs through the wringer of forum opinion and most would be considered broken if not adequately handicapped. You need diminishing returns on the advantages and ever more expensive penalties to offset the higher end abilities. Every advantage you give a ship multiplies it's value instead of merely adding to it.
I haven't seen a ship better equipped for mining than the T6.
We already have massive jump range on many ships.
The AspX is the perfect dedicated explorer already.
Creating a ship to rival the Conda would create another broken ship.
No ship should be perfect, even for it's intended role. There need to be reasons and sacrifices.

I would like to see more junkers, Mk Is, T4s and the like but we already have way too much power creep for better ships than we're already being spoiled by.
Variety for the sake of it is okay but nothing more powerful or capable than what we've got.

 

[Ian Skippy]

A dedicated science ship.
No hard points.
Generous utility slots for defense measures.
A plethora of scientific capabilities built into the ship (probes etc) at the expense of optional internals.
High-jump range.
It's purpose is to explore space and study the cosmos.


https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d9/40/e0/d940e06f55a8d65d60ce49a9eba621a8.jpg

You mean a conda without weapons?

 

[Acen ONYX]

Yes. More of everything. Especially small ships with more configurations. What do we have now other than the sidey? 2 cobras, 2 vipers, 2 eagles and an icourier. Smaller ships are the funnest to fly and no one likes them. Buff the missles and torpedoes. Make a small bomber. A swarm of small ships should be intimidating to something that doesn't turn well or have a ton of turrets.

*THIS!*

While I'd think of the old Saker-3 as more of a courier, or weaker small fighter at best (and never much of a cargo hauler), I'm sure it could be made (or, perhaps, "re-made" as a Saker Mk. IV) with hardpoints permitting it to be used as a Strike Fighter or Bomber...

... why does it look like someone's mounted a LOUDHAILER / MEGAPHONE to the starboard wing?

 

[Acen ONYX]

What I think we're missing, is not so much player-controlled ships (other than Alliance vessels) , but a more vibrant and active setting around the space stations. We have a big station, a few little ships and some security types whizzing around. Perhaps a dock if we're lucky to see one. What about facilities to handle large vessels like the megaships? We've seen various types of those, so where is the space-based infrastructure to support and service these behemoths?

Cargo docks to handle loading and unloading operations? Space-based refineries for tankers to hook up to? Automated cargo ferries moving between docks and the station? Construction docks that actually build these megaships - and all of our smaller ones?

I'm with you on this. +1

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

I'm not too picky when it comes to filling holes.

I'll take whatever I can get.

 

[Acen ONYX]

A proper shuttle craft. I mean a sleek, fast and high jump range run-a-bout. Defensive hard-points maybe, nothing offensive. 4 ton cargo max and little else; apart from looks and style.

Does an engineered Adder not fit that bill?

Actually, Sushi, in playing around with ship configs with Beagle Point in mind, the Hauler would be better, w.r.t. Max Jump (un-engineered!), and ONLY if you keep the fuel level not-quite-full for those longest jumps toward the end, there...

... and, personally, I think the Hauler's better-looking (and even "more comfortable" in the cockpit!) than an Adder..

 

[Mengy]

I'm not too picky when it comes to filling holes.

I'll take whatever I can get.

 

[Acen ONYX]

We need SLFs with FSDs. That is all.

So small system fighters that can supercruise but not jump? Like the Falcon, Hawk, Kestrel and Osprey. Would be something you could park on a fleet carrier.

I dunno is the FSD only for Supercruise? Is there a separate invisible module for hyper jumps? Anyway what I really want is small "glass cannon" fighters equipped with "handwavium huge" hard points, which can go toe to toe with overengineered "big 3" ships, but only if they employ their full agility and grace to outflank and outfox them.

So, literally I want to fly the regular SLFs with those same stats, but have it as my primary ship and be able to jump around and haul 1T of cargo in it.

"A more elegant weapon from a more civilized age"

I'll start by presuming, @Kaocraft, that you're asking a rhetorical Q, and answer it anyway - the FSD is, of course, for both SuperCruise _and_ Jumping..

I wonder if you're perhaps joking about having Huge HPs on SLFs.. I'd think that's serious overkill, and would represent a serious "design flaw", too.

Personally, I don't believe SLFs ought to have a chance against the "big 3", one-on-one, at all; I think SLFs ought to come together as a wing (or squadron of more than 1 wing) to combat any of the "big 3", especially "over-engineered" ones.. I'd even suggest that THAT's the way they ought to be used. They're nimble engines with guns mounted.

As for an SLF that jumps, considering "technical limitations", I'd suggest having another look at the Sidewinder -- which has Jump capability -- and try to scale that down slightly, to fit its equipment into an SLF, to get an idea of the POSSIBLE "Class" limitations of equipment going into an SLF, plus also the rather LIMITED RANGE of a small FSD as evinced by the Sidey, before even thinking of having an FSD in a SLF... >_<

That's not to say your idea is "bunkus", but rather that even if it were pursued, and say SLFs were granted an FSD module which allowed for jumps, the jump range would be ridiculously limiting... Hence the idea that they are SLFs rather than independent / autonomous craft.

Star Wars example being TIE fighters based on/in Star Destroyers -- no hyperspace capability, but small, fast, and maneuverable, and in larger numbers quite an adequate irritant for a larger opponent. Such, then, becomes the defining point of having "Fleet Carriers".

I'd go so far as to suggest that giving jump-capable-FSDs to SLFs is both illogical and impractical, considering the inevitable limited range...

 

[Acen ONYX]

A Federal Eagle. Pirate Hunter. Two military slots and a class 2 hardpoint on par with the imp eagle but less focus on speed. Hull tankable like the viper mk 4

Given Elite Lore -- that Gutamaya builds for the Empire, that Gutamaya licenses Saud Kruger designs (hence base Gu-ships are quite white, and sleekly-shaped) and other manufacturers' designs (in this case Core Dynamics' Eagle ==> Imp.Eagle) -- then please forgive me for pointing this out:

A "Federal Eagle" is 'redundant' simply because Core Dynamics manufactures primarily FOR the Federation, and so the Eagle is - practically de facto - a Federal ship, in the first instance, though of course "universally" used by many across all parties / powers.

For the sake of contrast, note the use of Faulcon deLacy's Viper (3) as a most-often-seen "police" craft, in almost all jurisdictions (since the launch of E;D) and more recently (with the addition of SLFs) supported by faction-biased Fighters, patrolling Station approach zones..

However...
I'd concede perhaps to the idea of, say, an "Alliance Eagle", being produced by a "new" Alliance-supported manufacturer or retro-fitter (NOT an Engineer), which has modified base specs off the base Eagle, possibly created as an inexpensive option for expanding the Alliance's defensive "fighter" fleet..
I could see it potentially fitting into the ongoing developing "lore" of Elite that a "new company" or corporation evolves / develops, with Alliance support or funding or sympathy, which could "advance" existing ship designs as well as possibly developing NEW ship designs which would provide "alternate options" to existing craft.

If not as far as that, then remembering that SIRIUS CORP is actually an "umbrella" corporation with several DIVISIONS, it would not be so far-fetched to attribute or create a "ship-building" arm of Sirius, to take them the "next logical step" from being a major manufacturer of both Drives AND Power Plants, into building those drives & PPs into space-worthy craft.

Inasmuch as the FDS, FAS, FGS are bought & flown by Imperial-types, or the Courier, Clipper, Cutter bought & flown by Federal-types, surely both Feds & Imps could still buy & fly an "Alliance Eagle", if the specs and outfitting options suited them better than the Imp.Eagle or the base (Core Dyn/Fed) Eagle.

Or, alternatively, an "Independent" Eagle, or "Sirius Eagle".

 

[zegram33]

It'll be interesting to see what the alliances "specialty" will be
as in...the feds have ships bristling with guns, the imps have elegant manouverable ships with less staying power, the alliance have......?

from what we've seen so far I'm hoping its "deployables". give them a required slot with some form of hangar (srv or slf) or maybe let them launch 2 at once or something

what id really like to see though is for them to tie it into the debate about "small" ships being kinda pointless: let any ship spend 2 fighter bay slots: rather than slotting 16 or 30 slf's there, you load ONE small craft. small craft fitted this way lose the ability to high wake (so in-system travel only) but are otherwise identical to sips you fly straight up. No rebuilding obviously and the "resupply" option in terminals would just cost the ships normal rebuy (maybe -20% or something)

I think this would be fairly elegant: the keelback (and any other ships that a re stuck with the size 5 hangar bay) wouldn't have enough hangar slots to do this, but exploreraconda's (and any other new explorer ships added) could bring a separate "landing craft" with cargo bays, mining lasers, srvs or the like so its less of a risk dropping onto high G worlds. Hell, add a size 8 hangar with 4/6 bays but fewer resupplies and that's basically all I want from the defender: can either bring a ton of different slf loadouts for varied targets, OR a few scary ships for personal use OR a mix.

I Already thought the dropship looking thing must have some form of deployable, and now if the kraits been redesigned to have it too....im really hopeful the alliance will be the "strength in numbers" faction haha

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

I would like to point out that this has gone on for eleven pages and not once have I given in to the horrible temptation of saying anything along the lines of "bend over and I'll show you", or "tgat's what she said", or any other untoward references to females in anyone's immediate family, that may have been inspired by the thread title.

Yay me!

 

[CMDR IPL Victim]

A sub-sidewinder sized small craft with a sub-class-1 FSD for in-system only work that can be outfitted with cargo racks and a class 2 SRV bay (option to swap for more cargo) with utility modules only (no weapons). Use new Small Craft bays (class 5 & 7). Purchased like SRVs, not printed like fighters.

Class 5 bay allows 1 small craft
Class 7 bay allows 2 small craft or 1 larger variant with higher cargo capacity.

Uses: 1) allow large ships to interact with outposts. 2) allow large explorers to land in the parasite small craft instead of the main ship... perhaps from orbit, alternately, from low altitude (ship hovers)

EDIT: 3) Allow multi-crew cargo activities...

possible future use as atmospheric craft for larger ships that may be aerodynamic bricks (gunship, T-9/10, Anaconda, etc), or for possible future water landings.

 

[Gryphorim]

I've already weighed in here, but I'll reiterate in the most cut-down way possible.

I think we need a few more ships to make multicrew relevant.
The first I'd suggest is basically a well protected freighter that has turret hardpoints (rather than having them placed in such a way that forward firing is preferable.)
The second is a more accessible smaller ship with SLF bay. The FGS is about the right size and maybe a little pricey/high performance for what I imagine, but it sits behind a rank wall.
The third (and possibly fourth) are rank versions of the second, for Empire and maybe Alliance.

 

[Yure]

Scout role needs to be fixed. Light weight aircraft with high jump dustance. Possibly with dedicated size 6-7 fuel scoop module slot. Very limited optional internals. Possibly low in size as well. In theory two size one for scanners. One size 2 for srv, and another size 2 for whatever other preference.

 

[azar]

I'd like to see some pricey, high end light fighters. Sometimes I'll get back into an Eagle and fly some combat missions to get that Wing Commander vibe, but it feels like a downgrade.

 

[NW3]

I'd like to see a Lakon large exploration ship, say a "Type-9 Explorer" with...

• Fishbowl cockpit
• Size 7 or 8 FSD, with a "stock" 100+ lyr jump-range
• 3 size 1 optional slots - for Adv scanner, Detailed Surface scanner, and Docking Computer
• Numerous smaller optional slots, to allow plenty of different outfitting options, but a few big ones for Fuel Scoop, Shield, etc.
• A significantly reduced total cargo area to reduce weight and make room for the FSD
• An "Anaconda-type" magical light-weight hull
• Limited weapon hard-points; this is not a combat ship.

This ship could also function as a fast, long-distance transport ship, to carry relatively small quantities of cargo or passengers to Colonia, for example. I would think a ship like this would be popular with the Fuel Rats, as well as explorers.