+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Freighter cargo hold size buff (/showthread.php?tid=103575)
Pages:
1
2
Freighter cargo hold size buff - Pavel - 08-20-2013
With many complaints about people flying big transports only, while various Junker, Zoner and Freelancer freighter shippers are not present around, what would you think about buffing freighters' cargo hold size by twice, to approximately 1200 units?
Would that have positive or negative impact on gameplay?
Would that help lawful trading and/or smuggling/unlawful trading rather?
Would you like to see more freighter trading done on the server, or the way it currently is represented, by medium to big transports portraying ever growing Sirian economy, it's fine as it is?
Is such a thing possible balance-wise?
Discuss.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - Omicron - 08-20-2013
Freighters will never phase out "regular" transports out of commision, given everyone wants their 4-5k to grind their money. 1200 would at least reward those people who dont want to fly a fat cashcow all the time. Null impact on actual economy.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - hungry-bank - 08-20-2013
If the price of the freighters will remain the same I see a small problem.
Civilian Freighter has a cargo of 540, if you double it you will get 1080 - guns, shield etc and the ship costs 1,784,170 credits.
Mammoth has a cargo of 2200 - guns,shield etc and it costs 10,114,750 credits.
So it will reduce the gap between ships and make some ships never flied I guess.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - Syrus - 08-20-2013
http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=98897 <- I did suggest such buff in that thread there, didn't I?
Very last two lines of the first post. I think the thread got derailed towards them more than towards my initial topic.
So...yeah, totally for that. (Also still totally for the stuff I mentioned in my thread...)
What impact does an increase of the cargo size for freighters have?
Well, it'd make them more useful for pirating, smuggling and maybe even short range trading. Keep in mind they have a speed of 400 ms, which is brilliant. I suggested to make them have up to 1k space, I'll stick with that. Increasing the smaller transport's cargo hold sizes (Gull, Albatross *hint hint* ...and Pelican?) to level that out a bit might help.
Negative impact? More pirating freighters. But is that really negative? I consider that better than GB or bomber piracy, since it makes more sense to me.
It'd probably help unlawfuls the most. Can't think of how lawful trading would benefit much from bigger freighters, since they use the "biggest ships available" mostly anyway. Maybe it'd also help law enforcement, since freighters are "easier to kill" (it depends, I know).
Is it possible balance wise? Sure, why not?
Could even be balanced around that at some point: giving better routes by making some JHs only accessible by snubs/freighters, brilliant trading routes.
I would love to see more use being put towards the smaller ships as well, quite tired of always seeing big trading ships and I feel like freighters are the least used ships overall, sadly. Also they need to be better balanced among themselves, with smaller hold differences and less armor/weapons differences. For example I'd love to fly a properly "Mk2"-balanced Humpback or Rhino one day.
EDIT: The beforementioned "but it'd make the smaller transports never be used" - well, they could be buffed in their cargo sizes to level that out. If the 2.2k transport is never used, why not make it a 3k transport?
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - Hone - 08-20-2013
Ridiculous, why would people fly transports with less cargo hold if it happened?
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - hungry-bank - 08-20-2013
Well mostly I`m thinking about the new guys, I`m not sure the advanced players will give up the 5k-er for a 1k ship.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - Highland Laddie - 08-20-2013
I would be happy with freighter cargo buff if there would be a transport buff with it, maybe up to 8k.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - RedEclipse - 08-21-2013
I'd love to fly my Dromedary. But indeed, no actual profit. If such change would be implied, I'll use it even more.
This idea has my support.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - lIceColon - 08-21-2013
@hungry
that's the way disco stuffs are priced
For every increase in price there is a inverse increase in value-cost ratio
think about the way armor is priced- 15mil for 2.5x protection, 800mil for 4x protection
the way battleships are 50x more expensive than snubs despite being only about 3 or 4 times as effective
the way a 5k'er while holding more cargo, is 3x bigger than a 2k'er, which is in turn maybe 4 times the size of a freighter that holds 500 cargo- but the freighter has a much higher agility and way more chance of losing pirates
the point is the more expensive something is, the less you're geting your credits worth- that's a good thing since it means you don't neccesarily have to grind to get a competitive ship
so
Quote: f the price of the freighters will remain the same I see a small problem.fits perfectly within the disco economy- and just because a ship is crap doesn't mean it won't be used- itll still be utilized for rp purposes, just not for actually earning
Civilian Freighter has a cargo of 540, if you double it you will get 1080 - guns, shield etc and the ship costs 1,784,170 credits.
Mammoth has a cargo of 2200 - guns,shield etc and it costs 10,114,750 credits.
RE: Freighter cargo hold size buff - Govedo13 - 08-28-2013
Freighters need better stealth mode then transports. It would make then preferable for what actually freighters are useful-small valuable cargo.
No space update is needed, proper cloaks for freighters are needed. Same story for HFs. Stuff is there it just need proper balancing.
Also we need more crossover ships like Pelikan but proper balanced and quite slower in movement because TS Pelikan is OPP.