Suggestion: make "Crane" more available

[SummerMcLovin]

There could be a space for a civilian battletransport (or at least that size of cargohold), but pretty much every faction already has access to at least one house version so it isn't desperately needed or anything. Junkers for example have the Shire, Bison and Uruz all at 75%.

Giving a lawful and large-holded ship to the Freelancer ID will very likely just have the majority flying it once they can. For those who actively trade to make money using that ID, I do not doubt for a second that the most common ships by far are the BWT and Firefly.
FL Pirate Trains are not as much of a problem given they are unlawful in all five houses, not just Liberty (as far as I know, not sure on Kusari or Gallia). Junkers have it as an option for Bretonia but the others consider the ship (and for Kusari and Gallia the Junkers themselves) illegal.

---

Kingdom of Bretonia
Colonial Republic
Independent Miners Guild
Ex-Admin

[Mímir]

The point is the ptrain is the exception on your ID, the one way you can fly a larger transport and still remain a seedy organisation, unlike a Crane that is civilian/corporate. Junkers aren't meant to fit the role of powertraders, in my understanding we've got corporations for that. You have brilliant tech that fits Junker roleplay perfectly, why ask for more?

---

[Pancakes]

Standing up with Mr. McLovin over here

---

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD

[Karst]

FL Pirate Trains are not as much of a problem given they are unlawful in all five houses, not just Liberty (as far as I know, not sure on Kusari or Gallia). Junkers have it as an option for Bretonia but the others consider the ship (and for Kusari and Gallia the Junkers themselves) illegal.

Actually they are fully legal in Gallia and Rheinland, and legal for "allied, friendly or Junker" entities in Bretonia.

But yeah, that's why freelancers get that exception for the Pirate Train.

As for the suggestion itself, I wouldn't mind lowering the cargo capacity on the Crane. It doesn't really make sense the way it is anyway, with only 500 cargo space less than a Stork there's really no reason to fly one.

---

[Ponge]

I mentioned Junkers and IMG solely because those the ones I only know surely to have 4300 cargo limitation by ID. Leave Junkers out of it, I agree PTrain is pretty much good for them.

---

[Syrus]

I'd rather like to see the cargo spaces of the ships with cargo pods to be set along the count of how many cargo pods they got. For example a Heron (4 - 3000) and Crane (6 - 4500) have 750 cargo space per pod. The Gull (2) and Albatross (4) have 1000 and 2000 cargo space, they should have 1500 and 3000. (Stork has 5000 with 8 pods, but then again, that is the limit...)

Why not up the IDs which could use the ship (civilian factions) to 4.5k cargo? That would still set the battletransports and the crane apart.

---

[Thexare]

I'd rather like to see the cargo spaces of the ships with cargo pods to be set along the count of how many cargo pods they got. For example a Heron (4 - 3000) and Crane (6 - 4500) have 750 cargo space per pod. The Gull (2) and Albatross (4) have 1000 and 2000 cargo space, they should have 1500 and 3000. (Stork has 5000 with 8 pods, but then again, that is the limit...)

You're forgetting to account for storage space in the main body, which is almost nonexistent on the Gull and Albatross but present on the Heron and Crane.

500/pod plus 1000 in the Train hull would work for all current models except Crane, which would need to drop to 4,000 to be in line with the others. Physically this doesn't make a lot of sense unless the cargo pods need extra equipment inside, but I work with the numbers I'm given.