Quick and easy way to fix cargo ships.

[Bloodsign]

I played Elite back in the MSDOS days. It was a "space trading sim." Elite Dangerous is a little bit broken as a trading sim for one glaringly obvious problem. All the cargo ships suck. You know it, I know it, FDev knows it. Only a masochist would use a Type-X for very long, not when there are faster, better armed, more maneuverable options with more cargo space.

But here's the problem, FDev isn't going to give us more internal slots for these types, this kind of fix will never happen since FDev takes into account internal layout when designing ships (foreseeing space legs eventually I guess).

Here is a simple fix:

Cargo role ships (Type-6, -7, -9, maybe Keelback) should get a significant boost to hull hardness. This is a hidden stat that determines how effective weapons piercing ability needs to be to deal full damage to the ship. Think about it realistically, what would the two criteria for a cargo runner be? Cargo space, and safety. A merchant would be willing to fly a heavy brick... If it has good armor to compensate for minimal hard points, lack of maneuvering, power issues, etc.

- Secondly, I suggest that trader type ships should get an increased jump distance, but at the cost of a much slower (three times slower or more, maybe) FSD chargeup. This keeps all the exploration specific ships useful for long voyages, but makes cargo ships a bit more vulnerable when jumping to offset their armor hardness buff. Again this makes logical sense, a trading ship should realistically have a very good range.

FDev, I believe these tweaks will be easily implemented vs. alternative methods of making traders more useful, without completely unbalancing the game.

 

[Bortas]

All the cargo ships suck. You know it, I know it, FDev knows it. Only a masochist would use a Type-X for very long, not when there are faster, better armed, more maneuverable options with more cargo space.

The Type-9 is actually the best trading ship availble at this point. It can carry more cargo than a Cutter and is arguably a lot more easily obtainable.

But here's the problem, FDev isn't going to give us more internal slots for these types, this kind of fix will never happen since FDev takes into account internal layout when designing ships (foreseeing space legs eventually I guess).

It did already happen. The abovementioned T-9 got an additional C8 internal a while back. Many combat ships got additional military slots and some other ship's internals were changed after release... i.e. the Chieftain got a C5 optional changed into a C6, the FdL's C5 PP-compartment was upgraded to C6, the T-10's power distributor was upgraded from C6 to C7 and so on. So if they ever had internal space in mind when designing the ships, this premise went overboard long ago. But honestly, looking at the Python, I doubt this has ever been the case.

Cargo role ships (Type-6, -7, -9, maybe Keelback) should get a significant boost to hull hardness.

They already got their hull HP doubled. If you don't neglect shields, outfit and fly them sensibly, all trading ships are virtually immune to PvP attacks already. There's no need to make them even more resilient.

Secondly, I suggest that trader type ships should get an increased jump distance, but at the cost of a much slower (three times slower or more, maybe) FSD chargeup.

Most of them already have excellent jump range. The T-6 and T-7 are exceptionally good exploration ships.

Personally I think trading ships are in a good spot mostly... the T-6 is by far the best trading ship in its price bracket... the T-9 is the best trading ship whatsoever... just the T-7 could use an extra C7 optional in my book. It should really have more cargo space than the Python. Apart from that FDev did a good job at balancing them.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Ninja'd by Bortas, and more eloquently than I would have put it. Just one more thing: Increased jump range won't work, for physics reasons. You don't want an overly large FSD in your freighter, as that cuts down on available cargo space. Cargo then adds mass, a lot of mass. Mass slows you down. The unladen jump range of all the freighters is actually pretty good.

 

[Bloodsign]

The Type-9 is actually the best trading ship availble at this point. It can carry more cargo than a Cutter and is arguably a lot more easily obtainable.



It did already happen. The abovementioned T-9 got an additional C8 internal a while back. Many combat ships got additional military slots and some other ship's internals were changed after release... i.e. the Chieftain got a C5 optional changed into a C6, the FdL's C5 PP-compartment was upgraded to C6, the T-10's power distributor was upgraded from C6 to C7 and so on. So if they ever had internal space in mind when designing the ships, this premise went overboard long ago. But honestly, looking at the Python, I doubt this has ever been the case.



They already got their hull HP doubled. If you don't neglect shields, outfit and fly them sensibly, all trading ships are virtually immune to PvP attacks already. There's no need to make them even more resilient.



Most of them already have excellent jump range. The T-6 and T-7 are exceptionally good exploration ships.

Personally I think trading ships are in a good spot mostly... the T-6 is by far the best trading ship in its price bracket... the T-9 is the best trading ship whatsoever... just the T-7 could use an extra C7 optional in my book. It should really have more cargo space than the Python. Apart from that FDev did a good job at balancing them.

Thank you for taking the time to make a thorough response!

I haven't attempted to engineer any of the cargo ships (just starting on that part of the game) but I have flown them all, you have inspired me to give them another chance.

 

[Bortas]

Thank you for taking the time to make a thorough response!

I haven't attempted to engineer any of the cargo ships (just starting on that part of the game) but I have flown them all, you have inspired me to give them another chance.

Glad to hear that, mate. I heavily (pun intended) recommend the T-9... it conveys that feeling of flying a truly heavy cargo freighter really well.

 

[Lestat]

I played Elite back in the MSDOS days. It was a "space trading sim." Elite Dangerous is a little bit broken as a trading sim for one glaringly obvious problem. All the cargo ships suck. You know it, I know it, FDev knows it. Only a masochist would use a Type-X for very long, not when there are faster, better armed, more maneuverable options with more cargo space.

No this is just your belief only. Other players have other views on this.

Here is a simple fix:

Cargo role ships (Type-6, -7, -9, maybe Keelback) should get a significant boost to hull hardness. This is a hidden stat that determines how effective weapons piercing ability needs to be to deal full damage to the ship. Think about it realistically, what would the two criteria for a cargo runner be? Cargo space, and safety. A merchant would be willing to fly a heavy brick... If it has good armor to compensate for minimal hard points, lack of maneuvering, power issues, etc.

Or you can Engineer your ship and the problem is fix. I heard some players are using Large Trade ships for Core mining and you have a ship with good agility to this one.

- Secondly, I suggest that trader type ships should get an increased jump distance, but at the cost of a much slower (three times slower or more, maybe) FSD chargeup. This keeps all the exploration specific ships useful for long voyages, but makes cargo ships a bit more vulnerable when jumping to offset their armor hardness buff. Again this makes logical sense, a trading ship should realistically have a very good range.

Again let get back to Engineering. If you work on Engineering that you have a longer jump range.

FDev, I believe these tweaks will be easily implemented vs. alternative methods of making traders more useful, without completely unbalancing the game.

Or You can tweak your ship with Engineering and you have no problem with the Trade ships.