board.us.ogame.gameforge.com/b…e/68093-super-transport/?

I can't edit properly on the .US forums so I'll put this here.

Super Transport: (ST)

(Also names like Mega Cargo, Hyper Cargo, or something else that uses the XC as an abreviation to fit in line with the other cargos would be fitting.)

Description:

"With the increase in loads a new ship was needed to help maintain intergalactic transport and trade. This new hyperdrive based transport was proposed and designed by a large group of prominent ship designing companies to fill that void. It has since become one of the backbones of transporation in the universe. "

Cost: Min: 18K; Cry: 18K; Deu: 2K or 0*
Structure: 36,000
Hull: 3,600
Shield: 50
Attack: 5

RF:
From:

• DS: 250
• BC: 4

Against:

• EP: 5
• SS: 5

Cargo: 125,000
Speed: 5,000(H)
Fuel: 120 or 200*
Prereqs: Shipyard: 7; HyperTech: 4; Hyperdrive: 4

*These two prices act as generic ranges. 2k being a possible amount for initial cost for a more efficient transport. Pay for duet for cheaper min/cry cost off the bat. Use them to lower duet cost over time. Duet could be raised/lowered to balance. Higher duet(near 200) could be offset overtime naturally as the speed overcomes the LC and gives it better range.

I've changed the fule and cargo around since I was working with incorrect data before and thought that there was a 7 difference between CD and HD tech costs when there is really a 6 difference. I've since adjusted the values of ships I'm working on to reflect the corrected data.

I hope I have worked out all the bugs in the design now. I believe this is the proper balance for a hyperdrive transport logically based on the already existing ships!

Summary:(Corrected)

SC is the medium expense fuel cost over distance transport, the most expensive Min+crystal/cargo, and is the fastest transport .
LC is the Cheapest fuel cost over distance transport, the medium Min+Cry/cargo cost, and starts as medium speed eventually becoming the slowest transport(around Combustion Drive 16).
ST is the Highest expense fuel cost over distance, the Cheapest Min+Cry/cargo transport , and starts as slowest transport and eventually becomes medium speed transport(around Hyperdrive 10)..

This ship is a trade off from mineral+crystal to duet. It cost less Min+Cry/cargo space than other ships for a lot more duet cost, both in fuel and initial cost. It would be an add on to the current trade ships and would fit in quite nicely and have many additional roles to play with the existing ships.

BTW, if you can't figure out how the SC is more fuel efficient than the ST it is because of considering speed of SC in regards to fuel(unless I calculated it wrong), It has less fuel consumption flying with ST than the ST. So ST remains king of the gas guzzlers. And this still not including the Deut cost go make an ST initially.

Which part is the problem?(I fixed some things, hopefully any problems are gone.)

The ST is starts at 11,000 speed at HD:4 which should be the same as the LC with 15,000 at CD:10. It surpasses the LC in speed at HD:10/CD:16.(like all other 5,000 HD ships)

It is always much less fuel efficient. It is a fuel guzzler! so the LC is always better for fuel. So it is better mixed with LC and possibly SC, or as a dedicated fleet for around close planets or for short trade jumps. I'm pretty sure this will be a good ship to send through any Warpgates to do short range large trade runs with in different areas.. So it's a very end game gas guzzler for when you really need to haul a lot of stuff real quick. I don't think you want to fully replace the LC with this unless you don't have to worry about Deut costs and fuel.

So to put it short. The ST is slower than the LC until Hyperdrive 10 where it is slowly getting faster(like all 5,000 HD ships) but much less fuel efficient. It's fuel efficiency compared to the LC is comparable to the difference between the LC and SC. So this ship is, again, always more Deut heavy giving the LC a place. And this a specialty use. Cheaper per Cargo but more expensive per distance.

This is a very late game hauler. And the LC is still desirable. Call it a luxury hauler for the well to do! Especially traders who don't use fuel for much else. It's not focused on combat strikes. But it can be used that way if you really want to.

Drive Values:

HD/ID/CD:
Ship/Speed/Fuel Efficiency

4/6/10:

SC: 22,000; Fuel Efficiency: 1,100
LC: 15,000; Fuel Efficiency: 300
ST: 11,000; Fuel Efficiency: 29.33

10/12/16:

SC: 34,000; Fuel Efficiency: 1,700
LC: 19,500; Fuel Efficiency: 390
ST: 20,000; Fuel Efficiency: 53.33

16/18/22:

SC: 46,000; Fuel Efficiency: 2,300
LC: 24,000; Fuel Efficiency: 480
ST: 29,000; Fuel Efficiency: 77.33

34/36/40:

SC: 82,000; Fuel Efficiency: 4,100
LC: 37,500; Fuel Efficiency: 750
ST: 56,000; Fuel Efficiency: 149.33

Fuel to cargo rates:

SC: 5,000/4,000 = 1.25
LC: 25,000/12,000 = 2.083333...
ST: 125,000/36,000= 3.4722222...
ST: 125,000/50,000= 2.5

2.0833333/1.25 = 1.66666...
3.4722222/2.083333= 1.66666...
2.5/2.083333 = 1.2

The ST is not the same Fuel/cargo/distance as the LC until level 34 Hyperdrive. Well past end game. So it is balanced, at least based on those criteria. You tell by dividing the Fuel efficiency by the divisor between their cargo capacities(Always 5). (125/25=5, 750/5=150) (300/5=60) The ST is 100% less fuel efficient at start compared to the LC. Even at Level 16 Hyperdrive when the ST becomes faster then the LC at HD: 10 it is still less fuel efficient over distance for the cargo space. 390/5=78, 78/53.33=1.46 Still 50% less fuel efficient per cargo space. And the ST is still cheaper per cargo space than the LC by 66.66%! (This is all excluding the 15k Deut cost to make the ship.)

It is also approx. 66.66% less fuel efficient per cargo/distance than the LC at Hyperdrive 9! The same % difference between the mineral crystal costs per cargo of the LC. Meaning it is a great late game transport if you need more ships for your Min/Cry(AKA a trade ship)as you can choose between this or the LC depending on if you can afford more Min+Cry or Deuterium.

I think it is balanced now! 8)


Edit: I think I know what you meant now. And you still need a lot. It's a divisor of 5 from the LC. And less fuel efficient so it is a bit specialized. But if you need 5,000 LC you still need 1,000 ST. It's not that much less. And with RF you need LC to protect in fights etc. I think it has some balances to that. I think it would meld in nicely with the other cargos. And it has the 15k Duet cost to compensate a bit for the increased cargo/cost ratio.It could alway go back to 25k/25k/15k if it's too cheap or somewhere inbetween. Though, I don't think that is necessary.

Summary:(Corrected)

SC is the medium expensive Fuel cost over distance transport, the most expensive Min+crystal/cargo, and is the fastest transport .
LC is the Cheapest fuel cost over distance transport, the medium Min+Cry/cargo cost, and starts as medium speed eventually becoming the slowest transport(around Combustion Drive 16).
ST is the most expensive Fuel cost over distance, the Cheapest Min+Cry/cargo transport , and starts as slowest transport and eventually becomes medium speed transport(around Hyperdrive 10)..

So does that mean it is rejected on the merits of the ship, because it is a ship, or both?

Does anyone still have any insight into where or how it may be imbalanced anyway. I'm just hoping to get this designed well regardless. Call it a hobby!

Lowered the fuel cost to 200. I think with 2k duet cost (or some other value)to curb it's usage it's a viable ship.

Also changed the ship to RF from BC: 4 and removed the RF from DE as it's redundant. It is also not meant to be a combat ship. It is for res hauling between planets first and foremost. This ship is meant for very long trading hauls.