I got the idea for this upon reading the comm channel thread with Gateway's request for a Pilgrim from the Congress.
So the Pilgrim Liner is classified as a "generic unlawful" ship, and I'm not entirely sure why.
It doesn't seem to fit in with the Pirate Transport and Train, and "dsy_testudo" (which is the Bactrian......right?).
All those ships were explicitly designed by and/or for pirates and smugglers.
According to the Pilgrim's infocard though, it was originally a civilian ship from the earlier centuries of colonization (sorta like the Ahoudori, actually).
So wouldn't it make more sense to have it in Generic Civilian, or perhaps Junker since they apparently build them these days?
It's unlikely to make a difference for most corporations, since they have access to the more modern Luxury and Renzu liners, but for corporations that are somewhat poorer (inrp) or those that need a rugged vessel not made exclusively for luxurious passenger transport, it might be a real choice.
Thoughts?
I wholeheartedly agree it should be classed as either generic civilian, or Junker tech.
The Osiris used to be LSF, too. Junker I'd think would be an alright category if they are manufacturing them and the nature of Junkers' law-abiding-ness, but not civilian, surely.
Junker? Nah...those things are considered to be old vessels, but not Junker vessels exclusivly.
I'd be for Generic Civilian as well ... and change the name from "Slave Liner" to ... something else, reflecting what they really are: very old exploration vessels. Making them "Junker only" would be even worse than Generic Unlawful...
Let Pirate ID's use em...
(05-02-2013, 11:57 AM)Syrus Wrote: [ -> ]I'd be for Generic Civilian as well ... and change the name from "Slave Liner" to ... something else, reflecting what they really are: very old exploration vessels. Making them "Junker only" would be even worse than Generic Unlawful...
It's called a Pilgrim. I think that changed during the switch to .86.
"Slave Liner" is merely a nickname, reflecting their status as ideal vessels for slavers. It shouldn't affect their tech compatibility, since they are not built by or for slavers. I would much prefer Generic Civilian over Junker, too, but Junker is the only other tech option that even comes into question.
Also, could some friendly mod or admin add a poll with the options Civilian, Junker, and as-it-is (generic unlawful)?
Why change what isn't broken?
These ships are built to be able to store people. For exploration means inRP you have better ships, so corporations won't need them, they are only of a use for slavers and pirates who can't have access to newer, higher-edge ships.
On that boat, I'd wish that Pirate ID was allowed to use them. The cargo difference isn't much from the existing 3600 one (not that it's any worthy of trading with a pirate ID when you could do it with a junker ID and be by far less limited), same goes for the pirate transport really. These ships are meant for pirates to use them, and a pirate ID that can only dock on unlawful bases because of rephacks (and not even all of those, like Mollies e.g) can't abuse them for trading much.
I don't agree that only slavers and pirates can make use of them.
They're designed to travel huge distances and remain self-sufficient, and there isn't really anything that quite matches that description available to corporations.
Sure, most have no reason to use them. But they may find niche uses, such as a research vessel or the likes.
Edit: But aside from that, I don't understand the reasoning for their classification. They are nothing like the rest of the "generic unlawful" ships.
As an enthusiastic pirate, of course I'd like to be able to fly a Pilgrim with Pirate ID. Somehow I doubt that's going to happen, though.
Considering Junkers are currently exclusively responsible for salvaging, retrofitting and selling the Pilgrim, a Junker tech slot would make sense. You need a large space station to do that work, and Inverness is the only place that fits the bill at the moment. Pilgrims wouldn't exactly be reliable, so Junkers would probably be required to patch them up incessantly anyway.
I'll bring this up for discussion and see what the team consensus is.