Panther Clipper

[Tividar]

i'd prefer if the panther couldn't fit. give us some new kind of gameplay around cap ship docking ports like the kind you see in X4 and automated cargo shuttles. Allow small ships (piloted by the player and owner of the panther) to dock in the panther and let you switch to piloting the panther. Hardpoints that dont all face forward. Perhaps panthers that act as support ships in the large CZ type battles gives you special objectives different from just shoot-em-up. They could have up to 2 active slf's, or the player could take control over a docked player ship (anything S size would fit). Also the panther uses tritium to jump and must be repaired via material synthesis.

we dont need yet another larger ship to just let the rich get obscenely richer with less and less effort.

I agree with the sentiment:

[Suggestion] How Huge ships might work

The Panther Clipper, Boa, Imperial Explorer, and [Nameless Federal Cruiser] would all be welcome additions to Elite. As Huge ships, they wouldn't fit on any of the existing Large pads (and couldn't get through the mail slot). But they don't really need to do they? Add a "ship hanger" optional...

forums.frontier.co.uk

 

[Hooplah]

i'd prefer if the panther couldn't fit. give us some new kind of gameplay around cap ship docking ports like the kind you see in X4 and automated cargo shuttles. Allow small ships (piloted by the player and owner of the panther) to dock in the panther and let you switch to piloting the panther. Hardpoints that dont all face forward. Perhaps panthers that act as support ships in the large CZ type battles gives you special objectives different from just shoot-em-up. They could have up to 2 active slf's, or the player could take control over a docked player ship (anything S size would fit). Also the panther uses tritium to jump and must be repaired via material synthesis.

we dont need yet another larger ship to just let the rich get obscenely richer with less and less effort.

Frontier isn't going to do that. Well just my years dealing with Frontier IMO.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

i'd prefer if the panther couldn't fit. give us some new kind of gameplay around cap ship docking ports like the kind you see in X4 and automated cargo shuttles. Allow small ships (piloted by the player and owner of the panther) to dock in the panther and let you switch to piloting the panther. Hardpoints that dont all face forward. Perhaps panthers that act as support ships in the large CZ type battles gives you special objectives different from just shoot-em-up. They could have up to 2 active slf's, or the player could take control over a docked player ship (anything S size would fit). Also the panther uses tritium to jump and must be repaired via material synthesis.

we dont need yet another larger ship to just let the rich get obscenely richer with less and less effort.

Skip the "we" please, because I want exactly the ship you don't want.

 

[RetroPaladin]

According to the memory leaks, Panther Clipper LX will have 2class x5, 1class x2, 8 utility points, internals PP7/ENG8/FSD7/LS7/PD7/SENS5/FUEL7, optionals 8/8/8/7/5/4/1/1/3/3

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

According to the memory leaks, Panther Clipper LX will have 2class x5, 1class x2, 8 utility points, internals PP7/ENG8/FSD7/LS7/PD7/SENS5/FUEL7, optionals 8/8/8/7/5/4/1/1/3/3

I hope that gets a little adjustment. I'd be surprised if it's light enough for a size 5 shield, so that goes into the size 7. That leaves 836t cargo without scoop, 820t with size 4 scoop and 804t with size 5 scoop. That still makes it the best freighter, but is also still a bit underwhelming, considering that it's basically twice the size of a T9. A 4th size 8 optional and size 8 FSD to compensate would be fine. Considering the the 8A FSD probably gobbles up ~20t of fuel per jump, a size 7 tank is still fine, allowing for 6 jumps without refueling. Although the configuration as leaked would give it 10 jumps without refueling, potentially making it a long range freighter, depending on what it's actual jump range is.

 

[Darth Ender]

Frontier isn't going to do that. Well just my years dealing with Frontier IMO.

yea, but that could be said about nearly 100% of the suggestions players make these days. Unless the suggestion is "slowly roll out what was developed already and reallocate internal resources to other projects", it is very unlikely frontier is going to do it at this point.

Skip the "we" please, because I want exactly the ship you don't want.

Why? what benefit to even rich player's gameplay would there be to getting richer faster with less effort? To what end are you getting that much richer for? All you would be doing is making the game loops you are repeating that much more pointless, and hasten the speed at which you grow tired of the game.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Why? what benefit to even rich player's gameplay would there be to getting richer faster with less effort? To what end are you getting that much richer for? All you would be doing is making the game loops you are repeating that much more pointless, and hasten the speed at which you grow tired of the game.

For one, this is a ship that has been teased since 2012 as exactly that. For two, it would end the annoying fact that a multirole ship (Cutter) makes a better freighter than the biggest dedicated freighter (T9). I'm not against new huge ship types requiring new forms of docking and/or carrying smaller ships at all. But please not the Panther, that should be delivered as it was planned as for so long.

 

[Darth Ender]

For one, this is a ship that has been teased since 2012 as exactly that. For two, it would end the annoying fact that a multirole ship (Cutter) makes a better freighter than the biggest dedicated freighter (T9). I'm not against new huge ship types requiring new forms of docking and/or carrying smaller ships at all. But please not the Panther, that should be delivered as it was planned as so long.

in 2012 elite dangerous was a very different "vision" of a game than it is now when it comes to income balance. Assuming it was similar to the way things were balanced when the game started, it would be many in-game days worth of gameplay just to get enough credits to buy one, much less outfit it and deal with losing them to pirate battles.

Fast forward to now, there is no place for the panther in this balance. The cutter and even T9 and conda make space trucking overwhelmingly easy and fast to accumulate wealth safely. Something bigger than them would just exasperate the imbalance and undermine the little balance that exists among smaller ships than it.

Given that the only gameplay fdev rolled out are grind loops, players dont want a rebalance that would give purpose to the panther because it would mean adding repetitions to any smaller ship as the income and cost is shifted to make a place for the panther at the top. And apparently ships are a huge investment for fdev to create, so i would think they would want a new one to count for more than just fan service.

We basically already know from cheaters that the panther is not anything like what I want, it's small enough to fit in the slot and just small enough to fit on the large pad and is from what it looks like a slightly bigger boring cargo hauler. A ship with as little purpose in the game as torpedoes in a game where every ship dogfights. And likely why fdev has been sitting on it for years. It needs to create a new reason for existing. The game doesn't need bigger cargo haulers.

 

[Greasetrap42]

If FDev released a Panther Clipper less than 5% of the community would be happy. 95% complaining that it doesn't meet their personal expectations.

And Darth Ender is right. It needs a solid gameplay reason for existing.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

The game doesn't need bigger cargo haulers.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree there and move on.

 

[RetroPaladin]

I want to use Panther as an AX ship.

FDev please release a version with spoilers and more hardpoints for more fun!

 

[Brrokk]

Hmm, I'd really like a new ship, and if Panther Clipper was available I'd buy one. I realise, though, that it would make my T9 purposeless and greatly reduce the uses of the Cutter too. Therefore it would really reduce ship diversity in hauling CGs etc. I'm not sure it's a good idea.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Hmm, I'd really like a new ship, and if Panther Clipper was available I'd buy one. I realise, though, that it would make my T9 purposeless and greatly reduce the uses of the Cutter too. Therefore it would really reduce ship diversity in hauling CGs etc. I'm not sure it's a good idea.

I'd finally repurpose my Cutter to warship.

 

[Tividar]

I'd finally repurpose my Cutter to warship.

This is basically my situation... I build Cutter variants for most game-loops because I like big ships. It'd be nice to have a different ship to build a Freighter out of.

 

[Robert de Vries]

Space stations would need a bigger mail slot and new XXL landingpads.

 

[MVBanks]

Space stations would need a bigger mail slot and new XXL landingpads.

Maybe it's not necessary - stations could use outside docking ports, and planetary stations could have huge landing pads. Also our Carriers should have a possibility to change 2 or 4 large landing pads (from 8) into 1 or 2 huge LPs.
Somehow, it would be logical to have huge ships in the game - frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battle cruiser classes - as any traditional fleet. But they should not be passive objects
like this Federal and Imperial Battle Cruisers, but real ships to pilot them, to fly and jump around. Some crew should be obligatory, because it's not possible to operate such a ship by only one person.

 

[aRJay]

Maybe it's not necessary - stations could use outside docking ports, and planetary stations could have huge landing pads. Also our Carriers should have a possibility to change 2 or 4 large landing pads (from 8) into 1 or 2 huge LPs.
Somehow, it would be logical to have huge ships in the game - frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battle cruiser classes - as any traditional fleet. But they should not be passive objects
like this Federal and Imperial Battle Cruisers, but real ships to pilot them, to fly and jump around. Some crew should be obligatory, because it's not possible to operate such a ship by only one person.

A use for the noob hammers.

 

[Tividar]

Why? what benefit to even rich player's gameplay would there be to getting richer faster with less effort? To what end are you getting that much richer for? All you would be doing is making the game loops you are repeating that much more pointless, and hasten the speed at which you grow tired of the game.

If FDev released a Panther Clipper less than 5% of the community would be happy. 95% complaining that it doesn't meet their personal expectations.
And Darth Ender is right. It needs a solid gameplay reason for existing.

Going from 720 tons (Cutter) to 836 tons (Panther XL) would mean maintaining 10,000 Merits (PowerPlay) would take 6 cargo runs instead of 7. I would absolutely outfit a Panther XL to skip that 7th run. I'd still prefer the Panther had a hauling profile of more like 2,000 tons as an upper limit on what you could accomplish with a large ship capable of fitting through the mail slot. For me, its not about getting richer faster. Its about reducing the amount of time I'm spending hauling Tritium and PP Cargo so I can get back to other activities I prefer.

Plus, its a little weird that some ship-builder hasn't done a full-cargo conversion on the Beluga.

 

[Darth Ender]

Going from 720 tons (Cutter) to 836 tons (Panther XL) would mean maintaining 10,000 Merits (PowerPlay) would take 6 cargo runs instead of 7. I would absolutely outfit a Panther XL to skip that 7th run. I'd still prefer the Panther had a hauling profile of more like 2,000 tons as an upper limit on what you could accomplish with a large ship capable of fitting through the mail slot. For me, its not about getting richer faster. Its about reducing the amount of time I'm spending hauling Tritium and PP Cargo so I can get back to other activities I prefer.

Plus, its a little weird that some ship-builder hasn't done a full-cargo conversion on the Beluga.

that's not really a reason for this to be made available. But rather simply a reason to rebalance powerplay or add incentives/gameplay within the PP game loop so that it becomes interesting to do in of itself vs just a barrier / pay wall / time sink.

 

[Tividar]

that's not really a reason for this to be made available. But rather simply a reason to rebalance powerplay or add incentives/gameplay within the PP game loop so that it becomes interesting to do in of itself vs just a barrier / pay wall / time sink.

You can make that [valid] criticism for a lot of the suggestions made here, but at some point it becomes a circular firing squad. I'd appreciate the Panther XL just on the basis that some shipyard should have statted out the maximum size the existing landing infrastructure could handle - in the same way the need to be able to transit the Panama Canal sets the maximum spec on surface freighters. That and if they already have the model and specs for the XL it should be easier to implement the ship than to rebalance all the various game loops the extra hauling tonnage would facilitate.