Panther Clipper MK suggestions and hopes.

[bbrauser]

I can't but be curious about this number you throw out in the wild. Please consider adding references to this. I know for a fact, and I have been around for a while, that quite a few voices on this forum are actually not seeing this as something worth pursuing. Is it 5%, 10% or 30%..?
I'm not sure, hence I keep the numbers to myself.
Amongst my friends and co pilots ingame, I can tell you this though, 0% want it. 50% (and yes I can provide actual and correct percentages here because I know the amount of players in my list) says they can be interested if a devoted team, not in the actual and current developing process, gets to work on this.

MDH

I can speak for my self on this point. I've played every Elite version since 1985 (on my commodore 64) and for immersion being able to walk around the ships would bring great pleasure to the game. Games like X4 Foundations, Starfield, and the carriers in No man's sky, to name just three, are terrific games BECAUSE you can walk around and experience the interiors of the ship.

Elite dangerous gained a lot of gaming value when odyssey came out and we could get out of our SRV's and walk the planets, enter and walk around the stations, walk around the carrier. So of course there are plenty of players who would love to walk around their individual ships........ as long as they aren't just empty shells with no window and nothing to do.

I'd love to see them as a personalized space where friends can get out of their own seats and explore / experience the ship while I continue flying us to our destination. Let there be a terminal where they can access the Galaxy and system maps and check in on their own sector and colonization projects, etc. while they act as passengers on your ship.

I have over a dozen friends who used to play ED and haven't for several years. Whenever I mention the newest changes they always ask "can you walk around in your ship yet?" when the answer is no they say "pass".

 

[RMLak2117]

A suggestion on the cargo limit, based on conversations with "vet" players in my squadron, who have been burned by FD's previous lack of attention/care towards the player base.

With colonisation forming out well, and likely to be a long-term core feature of ED, do not low-ball the Panther Clipper Mk2's max cargo haulage capacity. If you ere on the lower end, < 1000 tons, say c1200-1300 ton capacity, then FD will have spaffed a supreme opportunity to improve player base relations, especially with the committed vets and returning players.

You need to hit the tonnage sweet-spot on colonisation, per run, to make expansions outwards from the Bubble sustainable - ie not too grindy, esp for T3 constructions like Orbis - and fun. To spice up life on the frontier, in the new squadrons setup, consider creating types of "colony ship escort" missions, to bolster squadron members involvement in tricky, "on the colonial frontier" missions. Up the ante on PvE frontier pirate wings' combat capacities. Plus whatever "alien" narratives you have planned, eg defending colony ship assaults by Thargoids...and whatever else might be out in the Black.

Consider including "opposition missions" between PMFs, to both undermine and form alliances. Might be a Power Play aspect here to be explored.

We've whole galaxy to explore, and beyond! Be wise!

PS. with the Panther Clipper Mk2 you also have an opportunity to expand the immersion of the game through the much-debated "ship interiors".

 

[Uthael]

Do not balance the ship around colonization. Balance it around the rest of the content. Rebalance colonization around that, too.

I would be happy with 1050-1100t cargo. 1024 from 4x c8 (which would fit the aesthetic of the ship) and then some spare modules for flight and docking assistance, FSD Guardian booster and maybe some limpets or a fuel scoop. Or reinforcements if you're flying dangerously.
Having said that, it should be more comfortable to fly than a Type-9, making it a clean upgrade over both, the Cutter and the T-9.
In a few months, when PC2 leaves early access, it should be a sidegrade to other available ships. It has to sacrifice something for that extra cargo capacity. I wouldn't want that something to be pitch rate. That's what makes the T-9 obnoxious.

Edit: In this configuration, if you replace one c8 cargo hold with a Prismatic shield, you'd get a heavily shielded ship with 768 cargo and those above mentioned spare modules (which you could still convert to cargo). Still better than anything we currently have available and worth the Arx.

 

[Urbansparx]

I would hope that FDev, base the cargo capacity on what has come before, in the earlier games. But 1200 - 1400 tonnes seems about right to me. If it is not much of an uplift, compared to other transports currently in game, perhaps their sales will suffer. I doubt they would want that.

 

[Nadreck]

We don't have much to go on, except that the volume of the model is about twice that of the T9 or Cutter IIRC (the T9 is far too short to properly fill a Large pad, and the Cutter has all that wasted space between the main hull and the outriggers). So around 1,400t would be reasonable.

It isn't likely to replace the Cutter, which is still a good choice for stacking cargo missions (and eliminating the mission enemies those generate).

It's a bulk hauler, which is the T9's role. In earlier games, it was also a big battleship, similar to the T10, but Frontier might not give it that role in ED.

 

[ShiMan]

To be frank, 1kT (1000 T) is an absolute minimum. 1100-1250 would look better, and still sensible, in my opinion.

 

[ClagMaster]

Frontier, first of all thank you for your drive in adding content to Elite Dangerous.

The new Panther Clipper MK2 has us all excited!

The community are openly discussing the cargo capacity of the ship and want to express our thoughts.

The community agrees that a cargo space of 1400, (minimum) but no more than 2000 is ideal. Its under double of the cutter (which is meant to be a luxury Yatch) and much larger. The community have voiced that anything under 1400 tonnes would mean they wont bother purchasing it with arx (great money making opportunity for you) i myself have the desire to buy the ship and top up my arx to do so.

Please give this some thought, we really want to be able to haul a large quantity of goods for our new colonised systems! 1400 tones would make it that much more enjoyable! Even if you make the panther clipper turn like a beached whale, we wont be complaining (please dont make it drift like the cutter)

Ps. Please consider adding ship interiors, 90% of players are desperate to walk around their ships.
Thanks for reading!

-CMDR HALFBLOOD1917

Unless the cargo capacity of the Panther Clipper Mk 2 is AT LEAST double that of the Cutter, its not really worth the ARX to purchase it. I would prefer a maximum cargo capacity of 2100, roughly 3x that of the Imperial Cutter (with Shields). I think shields are important for rough landings to minimize hull damage (even with automated landings). I equip my exploration vessels with a light shield for that reason and for 1 to 2T (on a ASP) is a marginal hit in range.

In my experience with transporting materials to construction sites, shields are essential to protect the vessel during landing. I have had 3 Cutters destroyed (without shields) by as whole NPC pirates. Still need this despite Brewer implementing security around these sites because you will get shot at.

The original game directer David Brabin made it plain that having explorable ship interiors would greatly increase the programming complexity, memory footprint and download size of the game (considering the roughly 40 ship types) and would not be worth the investment (at that time) to implement AND would be a nightmare to maintain. Since then, with the Fleet Carrier and Concourses aboard starports and outposts, this has been relaxed.

 

[Capt. Hook]

I am running shields on my cutter for similar reasons as mentioned by others (i.e I'm crap at parking, peeps keep shooting me etc). As a side note, I am slowly chipping away at a t3 structure as a solo commander without a carrier (hopefully one day I'll finish and post results!) Have to use all those annoying T3 points for something after all and I've actually challenged myself to finish this structure I'm building to see if I can do it without the panther purely for giggles...

That said I think a cargo space for a similarly shielded panther, as a shielded cutter, of around 1200-1300 units is fair. That's about 500 more than I'm running, so say over 150 runs that's a bonus of 500x150 or 75,000 units or in other words, an enormous wodge of time saved hauling. I think it would start getting too over powered if hitting the 1500+ mark. As for ARX purchase I guess its down to personal choice (as always).

 

[Cottonmouth]

In my opinion, the Panther Clipper (according to the photo I saw) has 4 Size 9 Optional Internal Slots for 4 (new) Size 9 Cargo Racks (512 tons each). Released simutaneously would be three new Size 9 Shields; Normal (A-E), Bi-Weave(C), and Prismatic(A). These would be the ONLY Size 9 modules available in the game, and built excusively for the Panther Clipper.

The Panther Clipper should handle fairly well (for a huge ship) only when empty. Engines which can push 2000+ tons of freight can certainly easily move an 'empty shell'. It should handle like a depressed hog when fully loaded. It should rely not on weapons, but on shields and other tactics when attacked en-route and hauling cargo. Equipping the ship with 2 Huge weapon slots wouldn't be overpowered, as a fully loaded Panther Clipper would have so much trouble bringing those weapons to bear on a target that fights with smaller ships could become much more evenly matched. 2 Large / 2 Medium / 2 Small weapon slots, perhaps with an added Huge slot (just for fun), would make the ship work very well as a deep-space long-duration miner if equipped with Optional Module capability akin to the Corvette or the 'Conda.

2048 Cargo (without shields) would go a long way toward allieviating the pressure on Pilots who are involved in Colonization, and/or who employ a Fleet Carrier. It would reduce the repetitive nature of hauling large-quantity resources while preserving the 'scavenger-hunt' nature of the gameplay involving gathering the more uncommon resources. If Pilots could share resources and credits, the Trading 'bonus' of the Panther Clipper will likely spread more wealth among the player base, as well as assist players in their purchase of the upcoming Squadron Carrier. The gained effiiciencies would drive greater player engagement, and could easily attract new and returning players.

Balancing the Panther Clipper in-game would then become a matter of tweaking the handling during combat (perhaps against the Thargoids as a Shield Tank) so as to not create a ship that overwhelms all others in terms of sheer firepower and survivability. It should also balance against the Cutter and 'Conda for frieght tons/time-to-delivery vs. handling and acceleration, so that the Panther Clipper's frieght efficiency easily beats its handling limitations when compared to the other (smaller) ships. This last would probably require that the Panther Clipper's acceleration under boost be quick (to a lower top speed) in order to hit Supercruise efficiently. And, of course, it should be rock-solid under SCO boost, with a wide variation in fuel efficiency between loaded and unloaded states. Seeing a Panther Clipper break the record for longest distance from the Milky Way would be a fun event!

Thanks for all of your work on Elite: Dangerous! It has been a pleasure to stick with you for all these years, and I expect many more years of fun to come!

o7, Engineers!

 

[Bigmaec]

Any news yet?

Any news?

Bueller?

Bueller? Anyone?

 

[Nidoboros]

Slots for 4 (new) Size 9 Cargo Racks (512 tons each).

This is insane. Four size 8 alone would give it more cargo than a Type 9 or Cutter, and then you have wiggle room to add more with smaller slots as desired.

 

[Uthael]

Unpopular opinion:
If it's under 1200t, I'll buy it for Arx just to support that decision. I don't want power creep. For example, Python was a frequently used ship until Corsair got released. Now, why would anyone still fly a Python? Same when Mandalay got released. It replaced many Anacondas, Asp Explorers, Dolphins and Diamondback Explorers.

Power creep is just "number go up = brain make happy chemical". It's a temporary hype boost and only diminishes ship variety among players. It hurts the game in the long term. Especially when those Arx ships become available for credits.

Python Mk II is a great sidegrade to FDL. Pure upgrade on paper, but actually has drawbacks in combat. Well done on that one.
Type-8 fills a niche role, is therefore not overused and is actually comfortable to fly. Well done on that, too.

If players need a 2000t cargo ship because a game's feature is obnoxious without it, the issue is not in the ships' capacity, it's in the feature. For colonization purposes, they should just allow fleet carriers to launch 50 limpets and transfer their 25k of cargo to a station over ~40min.

A 2000t cargo ship will be a combat balancing nightmare. Instead of that cargo, you could put in several Shield Cell Banks and A-grade shielded AFMs to become too boring to deal with. A Cutter is plenty annoying as it is. Especially when fitted with a Fighter Bay.

If they do end up giving us a 1400+t cargo ship, I sincerely hope to not see every trader flying one. I don't care how they balance it, I just want it to be balanced.

 

[Tryohazard]

Power creep is just "number go up = brain make happy chemical".

For the right price and tradeoffs its really not: this is a game that evolves in real time. New features are added with an in-universe technological advancement. With colonization came a demand for larger cargo to ease the burden, and now theres a market for a new ship that fits said demand.
What im saying is its FDevs fault they made colonization a cargo marathon. But they can still make it 2000 and offer other setbacks so it doesnt make something like the T9 a complete waste. First option that comes to mind is making it prohibitibaly expensive.

 

[Uthael]

For the right price and tradeoffs its really not: this is a game that evolves in real time. New features are added with an in-universe technological advancement. With colonization came a demand for larger cargo to ease the burden, and now theres a market for a new ship that fits said demand.
What im saying is its FDevs fault they made colonization a cargo marathon. But they can still make it 2000 and offer other setbacks so it doesnt make something like the T9 a complete waste. First option that comes to mind is making it prohibitibaly expensive.

My man, if it costs 2B credits, I'd buy it. That's 10x the Cutter price. I'm against it now, while there's still a chance of controlling it. My brain makes happy chemicals, too. If they make it 2000t and allow for the Cutter and the T-9 to still be viable, I'll buy it for Arx, too. Out of respect for not inducing more power creep.

P.S.: Colonization needs rework. Maybe less hauling but no refund on commodities brought in.

 

[DemiserofD]

The Ultimate key is it cannot supplant the cutter as a haulage vessel entirely. That's a substantial portion of the Cutter's niche, and sacrificing one aspect of gameplay for another is not a winning proposition in the long term.

That's why I think it should probably have a downsized fsd, or have an extremely high mass. There really isn't a terribly good in-system Trader right now, other than perhaps the type 8, but the fact that the panther Clipper is going to be sco optimized means that just by default, it is going to be significantly better than the Alternatives at in-system trade.

Pragmatically, we can probably look at the relative size of the type 8 versus the python for a good reference on the projected cargo space on the panther clipper.

 

[Nidoboros]

First option that comes to mind is making it prohibitibaly expensive.

Look how that turned out with fleet carriers, prohibitively expensive, only people with squadrons will be able to afford the upkeep!

That's a substantial portion of the Cutter's niche, and sacrificing one aspect of gameplay for another is not a winning proposition in the long term.

As a Cutter pilot, I am fine with it losing a bit of that niche. It's a multi-role ship, so speciality ships ought to out-class it in their specialty. I'm shocked that the type-9 has less cargo, I never ran the numbers, or if I did I forgot them a while ago.

But that means picking roles for ships, maybe even primary and secondary roles, and leaning into those things.

 

[aRJay]

The Ultimate key is it cannot supplant the cutter as a haulage vessel entirely. That's a substantial portion of the Cutter's niche, and sacrificing one aspect of gameplay for another is not a winning proposition in the long term.

That's why I think it should probably have a downsized fsd, or have an extremely high mass. There really isn't a terribly good in-system Trader right now, other than perhaps the type 8, but the fact that the panther Clipper is going to be sco optimized means that just by default, it is going to be significantly better than the Alternatives at in-system trade.

Pragmatically, we can probably look at the relative size of the type 8 versus the python for a good reference on the projected cargo space on the panther clipper.

My suggested downside on the PC is that except for the one for the Planetary Landing Suite it doesn’t have any small optional slots.