This is a bit of a non-issue. We already have multiple ships that have split thrusters (i.e. 2 or more targetable thruster subsystems) that add up to the size of the ship's thrusters and count as a single module (i.e. all of the sub thrusters share a hitpoint pool). I see no reason why we cannot split a size 8 fuel tank into a pair of size 7 fuel tanks, or 4 size 6 fuel tanks, and so on (especially since we don't know where or how many separate sub-tanks are in existing ships).And to solve the problem with a size 8 fuel tank. They could make it the first ship with two fuel tank. Each up to a max of tier 7. That would give some nice fuel setups without using optional hardpoints. So, 2xTier 7 fuel tanks!Elite Dangerous 2.3 Ship Blueprints
For those not on any social media, I thought I'd post the link here too. The complete set is available on my blog here: http://www.elite-dangerous-blog.co.uk/post/Elite-Dangerous-Ship-Blueprints-23-Update 31 ships, 3 fighters, 2 capitial ships, 1 SRV & 1 station, in a choice of 1080p or 4K...forums.frontier.co.uk
Panther clipper? What stats?
- Thread starter Noobilite
- Start date
- Status
Yea, 4x 64s would work nicely if they go into the 4 engine pods that turn downwards on landing. I forgot there were 4 and not two on the ship.
The engines could pull independently then. Maybe a compensation setup where if you have more than two engines or one engine it can less and less efficiently turn by using multiple vectors etc. Then to kill them you have to take out all 4 engines to make it completely stop.That or take down it's power supply. Might help make it last longer when being raided as you might have to go after a larger amount of compontents to take it down. Or limit the loss of one of the easier ones potentially. The engines could be in 4 chunks also. Each with 25% hp or something. That or ttwo alrge tanks in the side of the ship inside the 4.55x40.8mm-50.8mm area on the side of the ship.
This is my latest guess on stats. Still not sure on the hull mass and how it would effect different build layouts. Any suggestions?
Hull Mass: 600 or 800t
Max cargo: 1504(1506) or 1520(1522)
Integrity: 540(300 base)?
Booster Capacity: ? <- How is this determined now?
Cost: 420mcr or 504million with the potential for a 20% off version.
Core internals:
7-8 PP
7 Thrusters
6 FSD
5 LS
8 PD
5 Sensors
7-8 Fuel tank.(or 2-4x tanks equalling up to 256 fuel)
optional internals:
600t: (1504-1506 max cargo)(Class 4 minimum shields)
8 - 4
7 - 2
6 - 2
5 - 2 (0 reserves/military)
4 - 2
1 - 1 (April update)
800t: (1520-1522 max cargo)(Class 5 minimum shields)
8 - 4
7 - 2
6 - 2
5 - 3 (0 reserves/military)
4 - 1
1 - 1 (April update)
Hardpoint:
2 - Huge
5 - Medium
2 - Small
700t and below allow for tier 4 shields. 750 and above are for tier 5 shields. Not sure on hull mass boost capacity or how much shields these dimension would produce. I imagine it would have the worst MJ in shields of any ship. But would be perfect to use high regen hi res Bi-weaves. Should make it more like the low shield high regen from the oiriginal game.
I know one engine layout has an 822t layout. So 700 might be good for minimal engines. Not that you would want to explore with this. 600t allows a 62ly jump range at max and could be used for exploration minimally and it opens up the 6A engines if it's useful for anything.. But 750 and over gets you a slightly higher 1520 layout for cargo with how I have it setup. I think 800t is around 50ly jump range max and around 25 full cargo with tier 5 GFSDBoost. I would think 600-800t is the correct range for hull mass.
I have no idea how combat setups would go to know how it's hull mass needs to be for different layouts. Obviously it will have the most powerful potential shields in the game with all the scb available to it. Although not as thick as the cutter.
Would the hull mass require a tier 5 shield or could it actually have enough for a tier 4? I'm not sure how the shields mj are calculated.
If using tier 4 shields it can go with the 27 capacity booster mark and go with a 4D engine focused PD for minimal engineering. A tier 5 shields get a little more annoying to line up. But I might just not be familiar with it. at that point weight starts to add up and engines are more limited as far as engineering goes. But might be doable if class 5d dirty drives are not a must have thing. Still trying to figure that out. You could support at a minimum of a 5d capacitor with engine focus and possibly recharge to get 1.7 regen on shields for minimal low draw 5d engines. for 33-35 capacitor boosters.
The shifting of the tier 4 slot to tier 5 has to do with shields. Then the slots support one tier 4 slots for mining or interdiction etc and also a guaranteed shield slot. This shifts depending on the class of the shields as there isn't really a need for 2 tier 4 slots that I can think of.
The engines could pull independently then. Maybe a compensation setup where if you have more than two engines or one engine it can less and less efficiently turn by using multiple vectors etc. Then to kill them you have to take out all 4 engines to make it completely stop.That or take down it's power supply. Might help make it last longer when being raided as you might have to go after a larger amount of compontents to take it down. Or limit the loss of one of the easier ones potentially. The engines could be in 4 chunks also. Each with 25% hp or something. That or ttwo alrge tanks in the side of the ship inside the 4.55x40.8mm-50.8mm area on the side of the ship.
This is my latest guess on stats. Still not sure on the hull mass and how it would effect different build layouts. Any suggestions?
Hull Mass: 600 or 800t
Max cargo: 1504(1506) or 1520(1522)
Integrity: 540(300 base)?
Booster Capacity: ? <- How is this determined now?
Cost: 420mcr or 504million with the potential for a 20% off version.
Core internals:
7-8 PP
7 Thrusters
6 FSD
5 LS
8 PD
5 Sensors
7-8 Fuel tank.(or 2-4x tanks equalling up to 256 fuel)
optional internals:
600t: (1504-1506 max cargo)(Class 4 minimum shields)
8 - 4
7 - 2
6 - 2
5 - 2 (0 reserves/military)
4 - 2
1 - 1 (April update)
800t: (1520-1522 max cargo)(Class 5 minimum shields)
8 - 4
7 - 2
6 - 2
5 - 3 (0 reserves/military)
4 - 1
1 - 1 (April update)
Hardpoint:
2 - Huge
5 - Medium
2 - Small
700t and below allow for tier 4 shields. 750 and above are for tier 5 shields. Not sure on hull mass boost capacity or how much shields these dimension would produce. I imagine it would have the worst MJ in shields of any ship. But would be perfect to use high regen hi res Bi-weaves. Should make it more like the low shield high regen from the oiriginal game.
I know one engine layout has an 822t layout. So 700 might be good for minimal engines. Not that you would want to explore with this. 600t allows a 62ly jump range at max and could be used for exploration minimally and it opens up the 6A engines if it's useful for anything.. But 750 and over gets you a slightly higher 1520 layout for cargo with how I have it setup. I think 800t is around 50ly jump range max and around 25 full cargo with tier 5 GFSDBoost. I would think 600-800t is the correct range for hull mass.
I have no idea how combat setups would go to know how it's hull mass needs to be for different layouts. Obviously it will have the most powerful potential shields in the game with all the scb available to it. Although not as thick as the cutter.
Would the hull mass require a tier 5 shield or could it actually have enough for a tier 4? I'm not sure how the shields mj are calculated.
If using tier 4 shields it can go with the 27 capacity booster mark and go with a 4D engine focused PD for minimal engineering. A tier 5 shields get a little more annoying to line up. But I might just not be familiar with it. at that point weight starts to add up and engines are more limited as far as engineering goes. But might be doable if class 5d dirty drives are not a must have thing. Still trying to figure that out. You could support at a minimum of a 5d capacitor with engine focus and possibly recharge to get 1.7 regen on shields for minimal low draw 5d engines. for 33-35 capacitor boosters.
The shifting of the tier 4 slot to tier 5 has to do with shields. Then the slots support one tier 4 slots for mining or interdiction etc and also a guaranteed shield slot. This shifts depending on the class of the shields as there isn't really a need for 2 tier 4 slots that I can think of.
Last edited:
![[VR] Goooost](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/111/111637.jpg?1589354934){kind=avatar}
It should have redundant internals. Two distributors for instance.
I doubt the Panther Clipper will beat the Cutter at ramming. The weight and speed of the Cutter is an outlier that makes it stupid OP at ramming.
Size 6 FSD ? My guess would be the hull is much heavier, plus cargo mass, so the first ship to use size 8 FSD.
Doesn't the lore have this thing cleaning out the resources of entire planets and sucking stars dry when fuel scooping? Lesser craft get pulled into its gravity well and stuck to the sides of its hull with no hope of escape. I'm thinking that instead of the Panther Clipper docking at stations, stations will dock at the Panther Clipper. 
And here comes the overhype again.Doesn't the lore have this thing cleaning out the resources of entire planets and sucking stars dry when fuel scooping? Lesser craft get pulled into its gravity well and stuck to the sides of its hull with no hope of escape. I'm thinking that instead of the Panther Clipper docking at stations, stations will dock at the Panther Clipper.
It would be cool to have "Huge" size landing terminals on the outsides if stations and be able to dock with some kind of umbilical extension. A lot of stations have maintenance features on the outside that could be converted to be these access points. So your average big starport might accommodate maybe 6 huge ships. Another option is to have external free floating docks for very large ships, and docking at these counts as docking at the station itself.
We'll need windshield wipers for sure, for scraping lesser ships off the canopy...
Isn't this entire thread one big overhype?
So "That ship is likely going to be 1400 hull, and carry 1400 cargo, and won't be able to fit in the slot of most stations. Think of a ship 2-2.5x bigger than a T9. It will also be the slowest and worst handling ship to date."
Really?
Really?
Old and new... concept arts then and now.
I liked the old one more but I wasnt expecting it after the new model was leaked a few years ago
that's what I'm thinking. I also think the max cargo will be 1256, 2000 ton would be a balancing issue, able to complete winged cargo mission too easily..
Edit, just noticed this thing is a major necro...
Merge threads if it bothers you.
The point was to compare the original idea of cargo size.
It's on topic and an open thread.
It does not bother me and seeing the posts from 2018 is interesting to see how they compare to today's.
Imagine a type 9 with sco and a max of 800 tons cargo with a size 4 shield . At least that's what I'm hoping for
I love these old threads getting necroed. Its like a dwarf pulling out a book of grudges, blowing dust off it and flipping to a page to gloat to the past.
Ah, "Balance", the killer of real fun.
Sadly, you are probably quite correct and it will be beaten to a pulp with the nerf bat for the sake of balance and blandness.
Still meat on the bones... It hadn't quite hit bleached bones, by around a year or so...
- Status