for the same adjusted cost you are much better off with the LC with the exception of the fuel usage per flight and a slight speed increase.

Cost adjusted to a metal base would be 5.7 mil for a "SuperCargo" and that would equal 304 LC

at 304 LC you get a combined total of

4.56 mil structure pts vs 3mil
7600 shielding vs 50
1520 attack vs 5

and 7.6 mil cargo capacity vs 5mil.

Plus you keep bigger fleets busier with additional ships to shoot at. This ship has more chance to be shot down with BC than the LC which only gives a 3 to RF. Even if you lost half of the LC your losses woul be substantially reduced.

It's not intended for raiding or fleet fighting, adressor. It's meant to be a floating bank. And since when is a ship's cost adjusted to a "metal base"? You're really stretching it. But I expected you to post something derogatory.

This ship is intended almost as a luxury item for those who'd rather manage large quantities of resources than large quantities of ships. A Death Star isn't all that impressive as a strategic weapon. Its too slow to be an effective weapon but everyone with any points has a few of them. For fleet saving, the Super Cargo would be analogous to the Death Star. And belittling the speed increase and fuel savings for moving enormous quantities of resources indicates a good deal of inexperience with playing at a higher player level in this game. BTW- my fleet has only been attacked once since I started playing ZE.

Any suggestions to improve the proposed configuration would be appreciated.

it wasnt derogatory, and for the record it doesnt matter how you adjust as long as you come up with a BASE. You know, math and common denominator kinda thing, apples to apples and all that.

I didnt belittle the speed/cost it was simply pointed out. Actually if you want to use it for resource saving, wouldnt you want to have a slower ship?

Nobody ever asked about your fleet being attacked. It wasnt a consideration.

instead of a superlarge cargo ship i would much rather see a large recycler... anyone have any ideas?

but for cargos... stronger defense would be nice they are always being destroyed...

I like the Super cargo. Especially for trading resources. Way more convenient with the large cargo hold.

I like it. I do think it should be slower though, like the great lumbering beast I imagine it to be

I would love this ship for raids... i could use it with BS and not worry about losses.

I do think that the cargo space should be doubled.

And a touch more shielding i think. You must remember that the shielding is important, when it's gone, every shot the unit takes has a chance of blowing it up. With that little shielding, the SCS's safety buffer would be gone after a shot from a single Light Fighter.

-Istalris-

Hey all,

Have not posted before because really saw no need to but...

Great idea Slash. All for the SCS.
However someone raised a good point about a larger Recycler.

I believe this can be remedied by letting LCs be sent with Recyclers to DFs.
ATM they just go along for the ride but do not fill up.
This would make sense logically as -

" Recyclers were deployed to the large Debris Field to fill up the fleets cargo ships to capacity"

What do you guys think.

SBT, I think doubling the cargo capacity is a good idea. Done.

Ista, feel free to tweak the techs to increase shield rates.

As far as being slower, that defeats the advantage of sending large quantities of resources to other planets in your empire, hence the increased engine level requirement.