The accidental T7 buff in beta actually made it the way it should have always been

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

Okay, the jump range was a bit too ridiculous. The T7 was never meant or designed to be a exploration vessel and thus it shouldnt have more range than the Asp.

But the rest of the "accidental buffs" were in place. The size 6 distributor is normal to ships of that size, and the hardpoints are still terrible so nothing changed in the combat metas, it just allowed the T7 to boost better.

But the main thing: the size 6 power plant and size 6 drives. This made the T7 faster than cutters and python swhich is is a really good change in terms of survival in open. The size 6 powerplant allowed the T7 to carry equipment it needed while still keeping the ship very hot running (which is a signature flaw of the T7, it needs to stay hot running).

Now that the T7 is back to pre-buff state, only with a slight jump range, its back to being a pointless ship. A worse clone of the python (a trading ship, which is worse at trading than a multi purpose ship - how does that make any sense?).

Class 6 plant and class 6 drives for T7 frontier. Gimme!

 

[Kubicide]

Okay, the jump range was a bit too ridiculous. The T7 was never meant or designed to be a exploration vessel and thus it shouldnt have more range than the Asp.

But the rest of the "accidental buffs" were in place. The size 6 distributor is normal to ships of that size, and the hardpoints are still terrible so nothing changed in the combat metas, it just allowed the T7 to boost better.

But the main thing: the size 6 power plant and size 6 drives. This made the T7 faster than cutters and python swhich is is a really good change in terms of survival in open. The size 6 powerplant allowed the T7 to carry equipment it needed while still keeping the ship very hot running (which is a signature flaw of the T7, it needs to stay hot running).

Now that the T7 is back to pre-buff state, only with a slight jump range, its back to being a pointless ship. A worse clone of the python (a trading ship, which is worse at trading than a multi purpose ship - how does that make any sense?).

Class 6 plant and class 6 drives for T7 frontier. Gimme!

Yeah and for the same price too - wait... Honestly, you might as well complain about it's combat ability vs. the FdL. Or it's inability to land on small pads like a Cobra.

None of the ships are well balanced in this game; the T7 is not alone here. But to your post: no, it doesn't need the super-sized gear any more than practically every other less popular ship needs super-sized gear. And if FDev starts (or continues?) with the power-creep for ships then you might as well have one super ship with different cosmetic skins to simply make them look different.

 

[Bortas]

Tbh not really... an additional C7 slot combined with a few tons taken off its hull mass would have made it the way it should have always been... the best trading ship in its class. Same approach they implemented on the T-9... no idea, why they tried something completely different with the T-7.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

Its one thing to create a power creep (power creep in trading? WHAT?) but its another to have a pointless ship. Why does the T7 even exist when you can just get a python? The T7 needs a rebalance. Something that would make it a superior trading ship over the python.

 

[GJ51]

Yeah and for the same price too - wait... Honestly, you might as well complain about it's combat ability vs. the FdL. Or it's inability to land on small pads like a Cobra.

None of the ships are well balanced in this game; the T7 is not alone here. But to your post: no, it doesn't need the super-sized gear any more than practically every other less popular ship needs super-sized gear.

And if FDev starts (or continues?) with the power-creep for ships then you might as well have one super ship with different cosmetic skins to simply make them look different.

+1

That's what happens when everyone wants

the Corvette to have the jump range of an Anaconda

The Anaconda to have the speed of an FDL

and

The Cutter to turn like an Eagle

Why don't players just fly the ship they like and use it for what they want to do?

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I think the larger T-Class ships need to be slow. I will say that the T-7 needs a plant upgrade, so it has more power for both stock and engineered modules.

My thoughts on it otherwise have been that it just needs an extra size 7 slot for a cargo rack, say a "trading slot". That would make it a better hauler than the Python, but it would still have the limitations of being a fat cargo vessel.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

+1

That's what happens when everyone wants

the Corvette to have the jump range of an Anaconda

The Anaconda to have the speed of an FDL

and

The Cutter to turn like an Eagle

Why don't player just fly the ship they like and use it for what they want to do?

No, that's different. The cutter is a big ship that is meant to be bulky, the Corvette is a dedicated combat ship so there's nothing mind blowing about having less range than Condas. But the T7 is a dedicated trading ship, it makes no sense that its worse at trading than a multi purpose ship.

 

[Pauciloquent]

Its one thing to create a power creep (power creep in trading? WHAT?) but its another to have a pointless ship. Why does the T7 even exist when you can just get a python? The T7 needs a rebalance. Something that would make it a superior trading ship over the python.

The yaw rate man... you just can't beat that yaw rate... but seriously I love the yaw rate on the T-7.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I think the larger T-Class ships need to be slow. I will say that the T-7 needs a plant upgrade, so it has more power for both stock and engineered modules.

My thoughts on it otherwise have been that it just needs an extra size 7 slot for a cargo rack, say a "trading slot". That would make it a better hauler than the Python, but it would still have the limitations of being a fat cargo vessel.

And along with that - introduce a T-8 that can fill the medium role, somewhere between the T-6 and T-7. That can be the fast, slippery trader.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

And along with that - introduce a T-8 that can fill the medium role, somewhere between the T-6 and T-7. That can be the fast, slippery trader.

I'd love that, however I would hate to leave the T7 in its current state and introduce yet another ship that's better than it.

 

[GJ51]

No, that's different. The cutter is a big ship that is meant to be bulky, the Corvette is a dedicated combat ship so there's nothing mind blowing about having less range than Condas. But the T7 is a dedicated trading ship, it makes no sense that its worse at trading than a multi purpose ship.

That's correct, but it has also been FD's pretty consistent approach since launch. The Asp was better than a T-6 for trading, the Python better than the T-7, and the Cutter better than the T-9.

The traders were pretty much cheaper, less capable ships that you used as a way to earn enough credits to get to the next level of more capable ship.

I'm not agreeing with FD's approach, but that's been the historical pattern.

My reply, which you quote was in response to Kubicide's post.

Your contention that a dedicated trading ship not making sense at being worse than a multi-purpose ship is logical, but not consistent with what FD has done from the very beginning.

They do seem to be making an attempt to change that approach with recent changes proposed to the T-9 and T-7 for 3.0, but it remains to be seen what actually gets into live and if in fact it will make T series ships more logically fit into the inventory.

 

[Cruel_R]

Wait..what? It was an accident? Source, please? I'm getting all misty-eyed here.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Your contention that a dedicated trading ship not making sense at being worse than a multi-purpose ship is logical, but not consistent with what FD has done from the very beginning.

Yeah, the whole idea of "ship progression" outside of the trading class baffles me.

That was poorly worded, but hopefully you get my drift.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

I'd love that, however I would hate to leave the T7 in its current state and introduce yet another ship that's better than it.

If we have enough ship options (and I think we are nearly there for all ship types), I think it's kinda cool and adds a lot of flavor to have "obsolete" ship types around, coupled with an appropriate price-drop, of course.

I think enough would still fly the T-7 (NPC's too), which in all honesty is a great ship and is wildly underrated.

The idea of low-cost obsolete ships woulf even have an in-game role, if ship maintenance costs ever become a thing again, as they should.

At this point, if they enabled the 5th hardpoint on it and upped the powerplant one size, I think the T-7 would be perfect.

 

[Morbad]

T-7 was fine in it's original incarnation, before they buffed it in 2.2 or 2.3.

The problem has always been with the game's economy that made segregating ship performance based on price pointless because money has been too easy to get for the last two-plus years.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

Wait..what? It was an accident? Source, please? I'm getting all misty-eyed here.

Yes, an accident... They're reverting it back (the T7 only gets a small mass decrease to increase jump range slightly, nothing more).
For the source, it was a reply to one of the beta threads, not gonna dig that out sorry

 

[Jukelo]

Its one thing to create a power creep (power creep in trading? WHAT?) but its another to have a pointless ship. Why does the T7 even exist when you can just get a python? The T7 needs a rebalance. Something that would make it a superior trading ship over the python.

The Type 7 used to have a poin: it's 40 million cheaper than a Python and significantly cheaper to equip on top of that. But these days that difference is pocket money even for a relative beginner.
What's needed is simply for earnings to be brought back in line with what they were in 2015.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

Yes, an accident... They're reverting it back (the T7 only gets a small mass decrease to increase jump range slightly, nothing more).
For the source, it was a reply to one of the beta threads, not gonna dig that out sorry

It's getting a distro upgrade to class 4 as well. (all the more reason to unlock that 5th hardpoint)

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

Wait..what? It was an accident? Source, please? I'm getting all misty-eyed here.

Hi Folks,

Thanks for the feedback on the Type 7 beta changes. We have read the feedback here and on other social media and we hear you. Some of the changes we made to the T7 were intended to make it more versatile compared to ships like the Python and offer a real option for longer range traders.

One of the benefits of the beta is it allows us to test changes like these and gage the response. In this instance it appears that the changes made didn’t deliver the results we intended.
We agree that the Type 7 should not out jump the explorer ships. With this in mind we have decided to go in a different direction to give the T7 some love while making sure it still fits under the explorer ships in raw jump range.

Here are the new planned changes.

Instead of giving it a size 6 FSD, as we have in the beta, we are going to lower the mass of the Type 7 slightly so that its existing size 5 FSD will push it a bit further than it currently jumps. From an in-game context perspective, Lakon will now be using lighter materials to manufacture the Type 7.

It will be keeping the extra size 2 optional slot to give it some versatility and we will up the power distributor from 3 to 4 (not 6, this was a bug) so that it can work better as a mining/exploration/utility ship.
The other slot size changes will be put back to their previous sizes.

This should achieve our aim of giving the Type 7 a clearer role in the game for traders and offer some more versatility, while not making any of the other ships obsolete.
As you can imagine, in a game like Elite with continuous updates, these types of balancing tweaks and changes can happen from time to time. I’d like to pass on our sincere thanks for all your support, testing and feedback during the beta.

Fly safe, Commanders.

Steve K

IMHO they went overboard with that change, but then, they nerfing it back far to much.
even when he mentions "mining",
the T7 will still not be able to fire 4 small mining lasers (the only ones that it can fit) long enough to deplete an asteroid, without overheating or depleting the distributor.

and to that other question, why they didn'T just shove in another cargo slot -> that already happened before, giving it slightly more cargo space then a python.
but for the fact that we are comparing a large with a medium ship in this case, the T7 should not have just "a bit" more space, but "much more"
the issue then, the T7 already beats the same size passenger ship "Orca" when it comes to bulk passenger transport: 152 vs. 96 economy class

 

[MickyG1982]

The Type 7 used to have a poin: it's 40 million cheaper than a Python and significantly cheaper to equip on top of that. But these days that difference is pocket money even for a relative beginner.
What's needed is simply for earnings to be brought back in line with what they were in 2015.

It really depends on how you play, sure if you go for the whole board flipping madness it's pocket change (then any ship below the big 3 is pointless), play the game how it's meant to be played however & the T7 still has a point. It's a very good trader for not much in the way of credits.

I still hate it however...