Ships Why does the Type 7 require a Large Landing pad?

Serenity03

Serenity03
I am sure this is a question that has been posed 1000 times before, but why does the Type 7 require a large landing pad? With dimensions of 82 x 56 x 25 meters, this makes it smaller in length and width than the Python. Granted the height is 25 meters but it's only 2 meters taller than the Federal ships like the Assault ship and Gunship. All of which can land on Medium pads. Is the 25 meter height the only limiting factor here?

Rack your brain on that for a while.
 

XOSHI

XOSHI
Serenity03 said:
I am sure this is a question that has been posed 1000 times before, but why does the Type 7 require a large landing pad? With dimensions of 82 x 56 x 25 meters, this makes it smaller in length and width than the Python. Granted the height is 25 meters but it's only 2 meters taller than the Federal ships like the Assault ship and Gunship. All of which can land on Medium pads. Is the 25 meter height the only limiting factor here?

Rack your brain on that for a while.
Click to expand...

These 2 meters are enough that the T7 would be remarkable clipping through the floor.
 

EISENHORN01

EISENHORN01
It’s one of the ‘flaws’ in the game that has wound players up for years. It’s an astoundingly bad design flaw that in the real world would have been discovered and rectified long before the ship went into production but as this is a game the devs simply ignore it. It’s like building a long haul truck that’s too big to fit in what are the standard loading bays of today thus limiting your market potential, it just wouldn’t happen.

Whats most annoying is plenty of players have come up with innovative ways to explain a change to the design of the T7 but unfortunately it would seem the coding work required to do so makes it a low priority on frontiers to do list (if it’s even on the 2do list at all).
 

DukeIronHand

D
Well put Cmdr!
And I wish it would be fixed.
And, FWIW, someone smarter then me calculated it was 1.5 meters.
And I'll take clipping in the short term for a fix NOW.
 
Last edited:

Hooplah

Hooplah
With the exception of the Python at 292 cargo, the largest medium pad cargo carrying ship is the Federal Gunship at 168 cargo. Frontier probably went with the large landing pad on the Type-7 with 308 cargo. Also when outfitted the Python can easily cost 4 times the Type-7 so a large landing pad for balance.
 

DukeIronHand

D
Hooplah said:
With the exception of the Python at 292 cargo, the largest medium pad cargo carrying ship is the Federal Gunship at 168 cargo. Frontier probably went with the large landing pad on the Type-7 with 308 cargo. Also when outfitted the Python can easily cost 4 times the Type-7 so a large landing pad for balance.
Click to expand...

?
...
 

Shadowdancer

Shadowdancer
The Type-7 is really cheap, has great jump range, is damn agile and quite fast all things considered, and it carries a decent amount of cargo. It needs a large pad, deal with it :p
 

MK Regular

M
Shadowdancer said:
The Type-7 is really cheap, has great jump range, is damn agile and quite fast all things considered, and it carries a decent amount of cargo. It needs a large pad, deal with it :p
Click to expand...

One could argue that the Python costs more because it is one of, if not the most versatile ship in the game.

When compared to the Type 7, the Python is faster, more maneuverable, has thicker shields, has more firepower and a larger distributor to power the weapons. A trade fitted Python gets the extra speed, maneuverability and shields in exchange for >2LY of jump range with a full load of cargo, 16T of cargo space, and a bit of hull strength. Sure the trade Python costs about 3x more than the Type 7, but at the end of the day I can take all that money I earned trading and refit my trade Python to go kill pirates in the local Haz-Res.

The fact that I have to pay 3x MORE to be able to take cargo to an outpost is absolutely absurd.
 

Vasious

Vasious
Hooplah said:
With the exception of the Python at 292 cargo, the largest medium pad cargo carrying ship is the Federal Gunship at 168 cargo. Frontier probably went with the large landing pad on the Type-7 with 308 cargo. Also when outfitted the Python can easily cost 4 times the Type-7 so a large landing pad for balance.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact when the Type-7 was introduced it carried less than the Python ( 232 tonnes max) and was a large pad ship
 

DukeIronHand

D
Shadowdancer said:
It's a ship that exists as it is. It's not something that needs to be "fixed". If you don't like it, go buy a ' Python and enjoy your miserable jump range at four times the cost. The Type-7 needs a large pad, that's the end of the story.
Click to expand...

Well. That was a well reasoned and thought out answer.
Glad that makes all kinds of sense.
 

Simon Templar

Simon Templar
I understand the underlying point OP makes, but I live with this fine as for me it is nice that most of the ships have pros and cons, and that can be anything from price to jump range to capacity to hard points to landing pad requirements and loads else. I fly a T-6 and an Asp-X currently, prefer the T-6 (I even prefer my Keelback to my Asp) and a trade/exploration T-7 is my dream ship, am currently saving up for its fitout. Sure, it would make my life easier if it didn't need a large pad, but at the same time I hope that the developers leave it as it is, as that is how the ship was designed, it is a big, bulky freighter, and making tweaks like this to make the game easier would just make it all a bit vanilla for me. So I'd rather keep it as it is.
 

DukeIronHand

D
Well, if we are try to put some real world sense into this, what ship designer in the world (galaxy?) would make the T7 narrow enough to sit 3 abreast on a large pad then 1.5 meters too tall to use a medium pad?
The same goes for the T6. Do you see how it sits on a medium pad? Too tall again.

No one is asking for some game breaking buff here but just a little common sense.
Think it is going to be difficult to argue that the T6 is not meant to be on small pads, T7 medium, and the T9 on large.
Otherwise the Lakon Design Bureau should lay off the Onionhead.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom