T9 needs more cargo space

[J.R.Ehman]

How is the T9 not a viable choice for trading? (...) For a short A-B-A route (...)

Yep, it's viable for a short amount of time for single jump or single solar system trade runs. That's a tiny fraction of trade gameplay. That is exactly why it makes most sense to get rid of the T6/T7/T9 asap. The multipurpose ships are stronger, more secure, have more jump range, etc AND they do every kind of trading. The fact that you can do anything faster and safer trumps the tiny amount of cargo advantage the T9 has.
You wouldn't be content with a fighter that can only damage one type of ship well or an explorer that can only scan one type of star quickly. Why are you content with a trader that can only do one type of trade run efficiently?

 

[UnhappyDev]

Yep, it's viable for a short amount of time for single jump or single solar system trade runs. That's a tiny fraction of trade gameplay. That is exactly why it makes most sense to get rid of the T6/T7/T9 asap. The multipurpose ships are stronger, more secure, have more jump range, etc AND they do every kind of trading. The fact that you can do anything faster and safer trumps the tiny amount of cargo advantage the T9 has.
You wouldn't be content with a fighter that can only damage one type of ship well or an explorer that can only scan one type of star quickly. Why are you content with a trader that can only do one type of trade run efficiently?

Get rid of 3 ships in the game asap? Including the Space Cow? *looks horrified*

The T9 is a little bit more than 'efficient' at trade runs - I can make millions per hour in my beloved Space Cow

 

[J.R.Ehman]

I meant the player gets rid of it from his fleet asap to afford the next ship if he thinks of all the ships as stepping stones. While it makes sense to keep dedicated explorers and fighters, there's no point in keeping a dedicated trader. That goes against ship diversity and the idea of multirole vs dedicated ships.

 

[V'larr]

I meant the player gets rid of it from his fleet asap to afford the next ship if he thinks of all the ships as stepping stones. While it makes sense to keep dedicated explorers and fighters, there's no point in keeping a dedicated trader. That goes against ship diversity and the idea of multirole vs dedicated ships.

I play as a dedicated trader. I don't think anything you've said is correct.

 

[Southbound Pachyderm]

I had a T9 for a while, I tried trading in it, and mining.

For both, it was considerably more vulnerable than my trading or mining Python.
So I sold it again, and continued to use my Python for trading and mining CGs.
When I could afford to buy and fit my Anaconda for trading, I found it had considerably survivability over the T9, and only a slightly less cargo capacity.
It also handled better.

I still use my Python. Lol
(Personal preference!)

I believe the T class ships should have special dedicated cargo racks just for these ships, like there are enhanced thrusters for small ships.
100% capacity is a bit OP, that'd make the T9 a bit too good.
So maybe 50%.
The T9 also needs slightly lower default mass, as it is just an empty box with some ship stuff glued on where it fits. Lol

I had the exact same experience with my T9. I put it in storage and only fly my Python now. I get better trade deals because I can go to ANY station, and it is one tough nut to crack compared to the T9. The T-7 needs to retain it's same stats, but be shrunk or changed in outer dimensions enough to fit on a medium sized pad, as nothing else is competitive with the Python in medium traders.

 

[Southbound Pachyderm]

Dedicated traders who buy Lakon products should have an option to buy a subscription to an encrypted comms network that allows them to pre-buy and pre-sell cargo at their destination before they arrive. You could set up your entire trade route in advance and just swap out cargo as soon as you dock with the push of a button on the mission panel. Maybe it wouldn't be available at all ports and the network could be expanded and maintained by subscribers through a power play type mechanic.

The subscription would be in-game money. This would also allow you to see prices at other ports without alt-tabbing to rougey's website all the time. Not that I'd stop using it.

 

[UnhappyDev]

I meant the player gets rid of it from his fleet asap to afford the next ship if he thinks of all the ships as stepping stones. While it makes sense to keep dedicated explorers and fighters, there's no point in keeping a dedicated trader. That goes against ship diversity and the idea of multirole vs dedicated ships.

Ah sorry, I misunderstood. But I still don't agree - I have a conda and a T9. If I want to trade, I still use the T9. It does have engineered FSD and thrusters to mitigate its weak points though.

I'm going to dig my hooves in and say that the T9 does not need any more cargo space

 

[J.R.Ehman]

Ah sorry, I misunderstood. But I still don't agree - I have a conda and a T9. If I want to trade, I still use the T9. It does have engineered FSD and thrusters to mitigate its weak points though.

I'm going to dig my hooves in and say that the T9 does not need any more cargo space

Ok, so you admit the T9 needs to either carry more cargo or needs a higher jump range to be sensible.
I'm actually surprised it took this long for someone to suggest everything is fine...as long as you engineer the trade ships. However, I disagree. Because 1. engineer mods were added to the game to give you a little extra edge on top of a balanced ship selection. The engineer mods shouldn't be necessary to make one type of ship in the game sensible. And 2. once you suggest a modded trade ship you have to compare it to a modded multirole ship and then the multirole ship gains even more advantage.

 

[777Driver]

I see the Op is Still trying to find a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[J.R.Ehman]

Not every CG is a Trade CG. Some people don't even do CG's.
You realize not everyone has billions of credits and one of every ship, right?

I guess some people forget that. It's astonishing how people with billions and every ship are opposed to any change. I mean they grinded through it and swallowed any inbalance on the way, so how dare some new player come along and suggest an improvement to the game?

While more space would be nice, i'd just be happy if a Python couldn't mass lock it.
I can accept the Cutter mass locking it, perhaps the Corvette, but not the Python and Anaconda. Anaconda because it has artificially low mass that allows it to turn and jump better than it should be able to (either that or it would need bigger FSD/Thrusters to compensate for extra mass), so its a bit of a case of having your cake and eating it with the Conda... damn thing shouldn't be mass locking a T9 either.

Yeah the mass and mass lock is in a really strange situation with the T9.

 

[J.R.Ehman]

Hello Commanders!

The Keelback is a beefed up, fighter-capable trader, which is why (I believe in the next beta update) we're trying out a few changes: minor increases to hull, shields and hardness, as well as increasing a size 3 slot to size 4.

Ok so the Keelback is finally getting the buff it needs to actually make sense in its role. So I guess pointing out ships that need a buff because otherwise they don't really serve the intended purpose isn't in vain with Frontier.
Since threads pointing out the T-series needing a little buff pop up every once in a while and this poll was pretty overwhelming, it's only a question of when Frontier takes notice...

Ok I just read that the T7 is getting a buff too! Yay! And:

Whilst the Type 9 (among other vessels) may benefit from some adjustments, we want to take things one step at a time.

Unfortunately we only have a limited amount of time and other resources to do balance passes. In fact, I think we got a surprisingly good deal with the current beta, which has allowed us to make and test far more adjustments than we were expecting!

So it's likely that further balance tweaks might have to wait until 2.3

Ok, so T7 and Keelback now, T9 hopefully next update!!!

This. is. awesome.

 

[bubbabenali]

Ok so the Keelback is finally getting the buff it needs to actually make sense in its role. So I guess pointing out ships that need a buff because otherwise they don't really serve the intended purpose isn't in vain with Frontier.
Since threads pointing out the T-series needing a little buff pop up every once in a while and this poll was pretty overwhelming, it's only a question of when Frontier takes notice...

Ok I just read that the T7 is getting a buff too! Yay! And:

Ok, so T7 and Keelback now, T9 hopefully next update!!!

This. is. awesome.

Indeed, I'm happy to read that.

Maybe the T-Series could get a specialised Module, like the Enhanced Thrusters 2A/3A for tiny ships.
Something like a Heavy duty FSD or high efficiency Cargo Racks.

 

[racer1]

That is a serious buff for the T7. It was already fit for purpose IMO but I certainly won't complain about the buff. As long as it stops these threads

At least there is no doubt about best trader in class any more.