Advice for running multiple contracts?

[NEANDERTHAL]

Hello. Recently, I've begun to do multi contract runs, but it seems to turn out bad a lot, with missed deadlines all over the place. Does anyone have any advice/oxps/techniques/etc that could help me and other aspiring contract runners?

[Cody]

Learn the chart; learn to judge distances/times; don't be afraid to refuse some along-the-way contracts, even if they're only a short detour; make multiple short jumps wherever possible; always dock manually; learn how to run. This tool, though external to the game, is useful for learning the chart and/or route planning.

[Norby]

This tool

Click on your current system, shift+click on your destination, then click on a highlighted line in your route to switch to the quickest way. Another click on the route switch back to the default route with less jumps but many players prefer the fastest instead due to more reasons:
- save fuel for your injectors if must run away from attackers or finish a misjump,
- save time for some detour and equipment fixings,
- more stops mean more chance to find contracts exactly in your path.

Longer contracts pay more so you can start with one across the map and pick up in addition only those which fit to the long route. Leave time consuming ship maintenances to the turnback point. The best if there is a high-tech planet around there where you can buy new equipments.

The fastest route is viewable within the game also if you buy Advanced Navigational Array for 2250Cr.

[Cody]

Learn which systems have conveniently-located rock hermits; pack plenty of cannon-fodder around those injectors... and never run out of fuel!

[RockDoctor]

pack plenty of cannon-fodder around those injectors

What? Do you mean to keep 10 TC of food in the dark corners of your cavernous hold, ready to dump when the laser bolts start mussing your paint job?

... and never run out of fuel!

"Trust in Tharg, but keep your injectors dry."

[Cody]

No, I carry booze for feeding pirates.

[ffutures]

Assuming you're talking cargo/passengers/parcels, start by finding a long-distance high-profit run and use shift-6 to get the minimum-time route for that run (if you have advanced navigation array). In general long-distance runs pay a lot better and have a lot more time slack than local runs. Any additional contracts you get should be along the existing route, or as close to it as possible. Whenever possible use the minimum-time route, unless it's obviously silly (e.g. a route that goes through 6 systems instead of 2 to shave 25 minutes off journey time), but remember that each time you dock eats up time for docking, refuelling, etc. And remember that maintenance is a huge time-suck!

[Cody]

It's worth mentioning that route timings are purely witchspace-time - any time spent in normal space is additional.

[Norby]

route timings are purely witchspace-time

You must add 10 minutes for undock, 10-12 minutes for buying fuel and a few more for hyperspace countdown, torus travel and landing to the station.

You should add at least 10 minutes to the displayed time for each systems in your way, even if you do 3 short jumps in a row before landing due to you will spend 30minutes in total for undock-3 countdowns-travel-docking-refuel. Occasional masslocks-pirates-repairs-misjumps need similar times even if you are a professional sunskimmer or use addons with fuel stations at witchpoints.

[Cody]

<nods> I think there was once talk about adding commodity trading to the clock, but I can't recall any details.

[Disembodied]

<nods> I think there was once talk about adding commodity trading to the clock, but I can't recall any details.

I don't think it got very far. I think it's a good idea - it would mean that players flying small ships could do a quick in-and-out whereas players in Pythons and Boas, shifting 80 TCs of this and 120 TCs of that in and out their holds, would take more time. Moreover, some ships could be notoriously slow to load, generally, and there could be ship improvements available. e.g. "auto-loaders", which could speed things up. It would increase the difference between ship types.

I think the main problem was how to calculate the time taken, and when to apply the clock change. I think there would have to be a "time taken" calculation displayed on the F8 screen, which would go up or down as the player moved cargo on or off the ship - i.e. if it took 2 minutes per TC, and the player sold 10 TCs of Food, then "time taken" would show 20 minutes; if the player changed their mind and took 5 TCs of Food back, then the "time taken" would drop to 10 minutes. The clock would only be advanced once the player left the F8 screen.

There could even be different times for different types of cargo. Cheap bulk cargoes could be moved quickly, but delicate items like computers and luxuries might require more careful handling.

Ideally, there would be some sort of mechanism to give the player a sense of time moving, over and above the clock winding forward. Just some clank-clunk sound effects would do, with maybe one clunk being "quick", two being "average", three being "longer than average" and four being "slow".

[Cody]

I think it's a good idea -

Agreed - though it'd be tough on Anaconda owners!

[Disembodied]

I think it's a good idea -

Agreed - though it'd be tough on Anaconda owners!

Only if they wanted to be couriers! In any case, if there's one thing Annie pilots have to have in spades, it's patience …

[RockDoctor]

and there could be ship improvements available. e.g. "auto-loaders", which could speed things up. It would increase the difference between ship types.

(Have I got the correct attribution there?)
It's been a while since I read any of CJ Cherryh's "space operas", but I've long had the impression that a considerable part of the model of the Oo-Elite universe is based on her books.
Cherryh's space station docking points had one standard size for crew entry/ exit ; standard sizes for cryogenics, fuel connections, power, sewage and other services, and a standard size of port for loading "canisters" of trade goods. If you think about designing a port for multiple types of vessel, you do run into similar restrictions. For example, in modern ports, the only way to get a ship loaded and unloaded more quickly is to increase the footage of quay it occupies and bring more cranes to the job. And berthing charges are calculated accordingly.
Cherryh's model on the other hand assumes the vessels are docked through standard-sized (and arranged) ports at one end, and so the constraints on loading/ unloading would be the same for all vessels. Say, 2 minutes/ LY of witchspace fuel and 1 minute to load (or unload) a TC of cargo. What the ship does internally is another issue, but the quayside facilities in a standard space station would be the major constraint.
Could you arrange a space ship (and corresponding space-quays) so that it occupied two (or more) adjacent berths, and benefited from faster loading and unloading? Certainly. But if you cast your minds to the everyday problem of keeping the wheels on your car aligned to within a couple of mm forward-back and left-right, and aligned to within a degree of arc vertically and forward-back, and particularly the expensive joys of fixing the suspension setup when things aren't right ... that's potentially a difficult task compared to keeping one cluster of interfaces in a solid group.
In a way, one of the recent discussions concerning mega-freighters which could host "shuttle craft" is a way of loading/ unloading through multiple space-quay berths in parallel.
Is there a parallel in the real world? IIRC, a necessary pre-requisite to the Shuttle-Mir missions of the early 1990s was the development of a module that could adapt the Shuttle's docking ports to the Mir's port. Similarly, how few of the regulars here do not have mains power adaptors in their travel bags (Shucko-UK, UK-Shucko, US-UK, US-terminal, UK-AuNZ are in mine, along with 6mm-10mm and 3mm-6mm pipe adaptors). I've never had to hook up an articulated lorry's trailer to the tractor unit, but they must be standardised, and now that I remember it, the mechanisation of British agriculture during WW2 depeded on the adoption of a common support linkage and hydraulic power arrangement for all agricultural equipment, which has become a common standard for combining support, mechanical power and hydraulics. And probably electrical power, too - IANAF.
Do the ship design - and station design - guidelines cover such matters?
It also raises another possible gameplay options. Say you have a large freighter - say, an Anaconda with two cargo ports at 100m spacing - and it sustains damage in a fight that misaligns the ports so you can only use one port until you put in for lengthy repairs to realign the two. At what point do you bite the bullet and put in for a week in drydock ("air dock"?) for the repairs, compared to limping on along your rounds with doubled loading and unloading times? Which classes of station can "airdock" an Anaconda?

[Disembodied]

[quote="RockDoctor"Say you have a large freighter - say, an Anaconda with two cargo ports at 100m spacing - and it sustains damage in a fight that misaligns the ports so you can only use one port until you put in for lengthy repairs to realign the two. At what point do you bite the bullet and put in for a week in drydock ("air dock"?) for the repairs, compared to limping on along your rounds with doubled loading and unloading times? Which classes of station can "airdock" an Anaconda?[/quote]
Interesting ideas … it might also be worth thinking about station tech levels: loading and unloading might be silky smooth and swift in a high-tech Ico station equipped with gravity sleds, and reasonably fast in a Dodec where the dockworkers all wear power-loader exoskeletons, but in a ratty TL3 Coriolis everything might need to be hauled around on handcarts with a regulation shonky wheel.

Of course, this would all mean that timings for courier and cargo runs might have to be tinkered with. Although it might be possible to broaden the acceptable delivery times, to smooth out the bumps between success and failure, to reduce the amount of tinkering necessary - e.g. very early delivery = fee + big bonus; early delivery = fee + bonus; on time = fee; slightly late = fee - penalty; late = fee - big penalty. Very late would of course = no fee and loud, often wildly inaccurate speculations regarding one's parentage.