Oolite Bulletins

I may be talking heresy here but if we had the ability for large ships to externally "dock" then the problem with the Anaconda could be fixed by just making it bigger. Ok that wouldn't fix any issue with the contract system but that is a separate issue in my opinion.

<ponders just how one goes about externally docking with a rotating object>

Diziet Sma wrote:

<ponders just how one goes about externally docking with a rotating object>

You don't which is why I put it in quotes. It's more the idea that the ship is sitting outside and the docking is done with shuttle craft. (ie. the ship is in a "docked state".) Though for other non-rotating stations it could mean physically docking on the outside.

Perhaps Missions and contracts could be made available for the Anaconda if it lands on a planet (using planetfall OXP?) This means it could be made bigger, keep its existing capacity and it gets round the docking issue. Missions could be made available for the combine harvesters etc mentioned earlier in the thread, and how about also mass-evacuation rescue missions (where its size would really come into its own) for refugees from planets plagued by civil war, or planets whos sun is about to go supernova etc? Might add an extra dimension..

StarTrader wrote:

Perhaps Missions and contracts could be made available for the Anaconda if it lands on a planet (using planetfall OXP?) This means it could be made bigger, keep its existing capacity and it gets round the docking issue. Missions could be made available for the combine harvesters etc mentioned earlier in the thread, and how about also mass-evacuation rescue missions (where its size would really come into its own) for refugees from planets plagued by civil war, or planets whos sun is about to go supernova etc? Might add an extra dimension..

There are a couple of problems with this:

• It's a pure OXP solution. You cannot land on planets without a certain OXP. But the Anaconda is part of the basic ship set, thus it should be useful already in vanilla Oolite.
• The Anaconda really doesn't look like a ship that would be able to land on planets in the first place. It would fall out of the sky like a brick, and would never stand the slightest chance of taking off again when fully loaded.
• As part of the basic ship set it can't be made bigger than the standard docking bay anyway, because that would seriously affect its usability as an NPC ship. Again, in vanilla Oolite it would never launch from a station, and it could never dock. Under these conditions we could just remove it completely.

I saw somewhere...but I forget where...at least talk about making the Anaconda about 50-100% longer. It could still dock with the main station that way, but would come closer to looking like it had the internal capacity to hold 750 TC of cargo.

Switeck wrote:

making the Anaconda about 50-100% longer

That seems to be a good solution for the "Anaconda problem".

Got to say I was a little split about this at first, on the one hand regardless of coffee stained typos it was 750 in the original and so should remain true to its roots here but on the other by Frontier the Anaconda had shrunk considerably and was smaller than the Boa.

I can see the argument for addressing the scale issue but the problem with that would be the number of ships that would need to be fixed also and that would be so subjective and would likely change the balance and usefulness of many of the core ships which basically defeats the point of a true elite remake

I say leave her alone, the Anaconda has nothing else going for it, its slow and clumsy and reducing the capacity would simply make it into the worst boa variant. The scale issue isn't really an issue anyway and is easily explained by the tiny engines and sparse life support facilities which free up 90% of her volume for cargo, unlike the lavish modern boa's much more powerful but significantly larger powerplant and on suite crew quarters, I like to think of the Anaconda as essentially a Boa stripped to the hull with a Gecko strapped to the aft

JD wrote:

Switeck wrote:

I could even take more cargo contracts than total capacity by temporarily offloading my goods at a station so I had room to get more. This could prove problematic because I'd need to re-buy similar goods later before reaching the destinations.

This has always struck me as a something of a flaw in the cargo business. If someone wants to pay me over the odds to shift some cargo from one end of the chart to the other, you'd think they'd be the tiniest bit particular that the recipient received the same goods at the other end. It should probably penalize you if the contents of your hold drop below the contracted amount.

But it makes things *interesting* and thus *fun*. It gives options for creativity and risk taking. If I wanted to limit myself to a bunch of arbitrary suffocating rules I'd just stay in the RL and not play oolite...where the whose raison d'etre is flexibility and the open ooniverse.

CmdrLUke wrote:

JD wrote:

Switeck wrote:

I could even take more cargo contracts than total capacity by temporarily offloading my goods at a station so I had room to get more. This could prove problematic because I'd need to re-buy similar goods later before reaching the destinations.

This has always struck me as a something of a flaw in the cargo business. If someone wants to pay me over the odds to shift some cargo from one end of the chart to the other, you'd think they'd be the tiniest bit particular that the recipient received the same goods at the other end. It should probably penalize you if the contents of your hold drop below the contracted amount.

But it makes things *interesting* and thus *fun*. It gives options for creativity and risk taking. If I wanted to limit myself to a bunch of arbitrary suffocating rules I'd just stay in the RL and not play oolite...where the whose raison d'etre is flexibility and the open ooniverse.

Commodities tend to be fungible (by definition). If someone hires you to transport 750tc of low-grade iron ore, and you turn up at the destination with 750tc of identical-quality of iron ore, then it shouldn't matter (much) if some of the lumps of rocks in your hold are not the same ones you set out with. (Although, that said, if you are swapping cargoes on-route, that probably means you are making extra money for yourself, which the suppliers/recievers might see as you scamming them unless they got a cut).

The real problem is that Elite/Oolite treats differentiated goods like computers and machinary as commodities to be traded by the ton.

There is also the danger of having your cargo destroyed before reaching the destination due to your ship taking hits while shields are down. Unless the cargo were semi-easily replaceable, it would increase the difficulty of doing very long range cargo contracts.

Other than some of the precious metals (Gold/Plat/Gems) contracts, cargo contracts are not very profitable (when considering opportunity costs and equivalent trading) or reasonable. If cargo contracts were for specialty items (which you couldn't replace) instead of commodities, then their profitability is practically unfair/imbalanced.

Switeck wrote:

There is also the danger of having your cargo destroyed before reaching the destination due to your ship taking hits while shields are down. Unless the cargo were semi-easily replaceable, it would increase the difficulty of doing very long range cargo contracts.

True - for this to work with any form of "special" cargo there would have to be some sort of payment for partial delivery. The chance that a portion of the cargo they've ordered might get destroyed in transit would be a risk that buyers would have to accept.

Disembodied wrote:

Switeck wrote:

There is also the danger of having your cargo destroyed before reaching the destination due to your ship taking hits while shields are down. Unless the cargo were semi-easily replaceable, it would increase the difficulty of doing very long range cargo contracts.

True - for this to work with any form of "special" cargo there would have to be some sort of payment for partial delivery. The chance that a portion of the cargo they've ordered might get destroyed in transit would be a risk that buyers would have to accept.

For anyone who wants to try "special" cargo trading, I suggest they get cim's New Cargos OXP and give it a try. Amongst other things, it addresses the point raised above, in that partial deliveries are handled smoothly.

You must read all the documentation available on the Wiki (especially the more detailed trading advice page) if you hope to succeed, though.. it is not as easy as it sounds, and can result in considerable losses if you are not careful, or have some bad luck.

As a change from my usual bounty-hunting, I quite enjoy the extra risk and challenge it offers. Trading is no longer (relatively) boring.

Commander McLane wrote:

StarTrader wrote:

...Missions could be made available for the combine harvesters etc mentioned earlier in the thread, and how about also mass-evacuation rescue missions (where its size would really come into its own) for refugees from planets plagued by civil war, or planets whos sun is about to go supernova etc? Might add an extra dimension..

...

• It's a pure OXP solution. You cannot land on planets without a certain OXP. But the Anaconda is part of the basic ship set, thus it should be useful already in vanilla Oolite.

That does sound like an interesting OXP. Certain kinds of contracts where a specialty mission item taking up n TC is carried from one planet to another, with a varying degree of legality even.

I guess for many it depends on whether you believe its possible to fit all those cannisters inside an Anaconda, well assuming 1TC is 1 cubic meter (which I do) this is what 750 of the blighters look like