Interstellar Shipping and Mercantile Guild Design Discussion

[nphillips]

Forking a thread in which Fendorin and I were discussing the Merchant ship designs....

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/forum ... =4&t=13481
Here you can find a beginning of a tentative to texture the OX
i will pack and post the file i have done for this model (if it's any help for you) but anyway let you do it as you what .


For Merchant ship i will be as you more oriented to the OX shape but maybe less "symetrical" definitively utilitarian style
modularity

Merchant ship are basicly:
Modulable
Tiny crew quarter
Obvious thruster (maneuvring to)
the deck is on front of the ship for easy landing
heavily oriented to bulk Transport and nothing else (ressorces gathering seems to be not a Merchant guild speciality into VS)

Do you want a prelim graphic sketch concept??

a new designed ship with different module for transport bulk will be great. (transport alive item is not transport Ore)
OX have to be a good frame with "multipurpose"orientation.

Yeah, I came across the Ox Texturing. It's definitely a start, and I could certainly incorporate that into the design

With regard to design, I was wondering if we need some sort of "container standard". It makes a lot of sense for larger ships like the Ox, and ultimately the Elephant, to be completely modular. Tugs move loaded containers into position, and they're secured to the transport ship. Unladen, the Ox and Elephant are giant sticks with thrusters.

But, I think we're both on the same page

I think the Mule is (mostly) fine as it is -- it's a smaller ship, so the modular system isn't as necessary. It makes more sense that it would be used for transporting similar items from point A to B. The Ox might have 10 containers (possibly the size of a mule, too), each with different materials, and every one going to a different base in the area. In other words, the Mule is a one-trip ship, for short distances, and the Ox would handle massive transfers across several jumps.

At this point, I think we should start a new topic. We're definitely getting into Merchant-specific information, and are no longer discussing the original question

So, to sum that up, and continue the conversation:
Merchant ships are

• Modular (we should see empty skeletons flying, and containers floating outside of bases; the old X-Wing and TIE Fighter games are PERFECT examples of this)
• Tiny crew quarters
• Obvious thrusters (maneuvering too)
• The deck is on front of the ship for easy landing
• Heavily oriented for bulk Transport and nothing else (resource gathering is not a Merchant guild specialty)

[Fendorin]

here i did by time some concept the most close i have for merchant look like for inspiration

a Dockyard/warehouse station just for the ambiance:

[chuck_starchaser]

Standardized containers would be a bonanza...
1) They make sense
2) They can be saved as sub-units and re-used.

But they have to be well thought out. As Fendorin was saying, a container for ore and a container
for livestock would not look the same. Same goes for containers for finished goods or appliances;
containers for liquids or liquified gases. All have different requirements.
They would all have the same size, and attach similarly; but a container for liquid air would be a
cylinder with hemispherical ends. A container for livestock would probably have many small doors
and a big radiator, to regulate temperature. An ore container would have just one big door looking
dirty and all banged up; and so on.
Also, there'd probably be two or three standard sizes --doublings in size, probably, but the doors
and equipment would probably not increase in size.

EDIT:
One likely ship profile would be a cross-like cross section, like a "+" sign, with attachments for four
containers. Engines would be around the inner corners of the +.

[nphillips]

The first two are headed in the right direction, for sure. The last one, which is a station, is still quite a bit like what I'd picture the Elephant as. Except that the sections perpendicular to the spine would be inertial nightmares.

Question: Are we aiming for realism or "cool factor"? Or something in between? It looks like there's some sort of artificial gravity in play, but we're using marginally realistic physics for motion (retro and maneuvering thrusters, for example).

For these ships, realism boils down to fairly repetitive designs. You just scale them up in order to accommodate more massive cargo. But for the sake of an interesting game, we need to take artistic license with reality I think what we need to do is find a happy medium.

[chuck_starchaser]

Never heard of artificial gravity in VS. In WC yes; and inertial compensators too; but not in VS.
VS has two prominent unrealities: Spec, which is necessary; and ridiculous accelerations,
which aren't, IMO. Having said that, gravitation is not modeled for ships; only for planetary
motions; reason being that the ships have such powerful thrusters they don't need to orbit;
they can stay stationary, hovering above Jupiter, no problem; so gravitation makes little
difference in travel planning.

About realism, there's been enough little of it; I'd say bring it on. What's the problem
you're thinking about, exactly? Don't get it from your post. What do you need to
compromise for coolness? There's already plenty of ships without visible containers.
You could put in a dozen variants and it wouldn't get boring.
Besides, modular ships you can make a dozen in units.csv for each frame variant, just
by attaching different container combos. That will add variety to the game, not subtract.
Right now you can fly around, and you don't know a cruiser from a cargo ship. Their
purpose is not obvious. Time to have cargo ships that are obvious.

[nphillips]

What I was getting at, with regard to artificial gravity, is that all of the ship and station orientations match what we would expect to see on Earth. That is, motion along the X-axis, gravity along the Z. (look at the windows in the images Fendorin posted in this thread; or even the cockpit of the Llama)

Realistically, gravity is along the same axis as the acceleration, and the ships should rotate to decelerate, which would continue to provide gravity for the occupants (which I know you know, chuck...just providing commentary for everyone else who might not).

[chuck_starchaser]

Ahhhhh... Gottcha. You're right; there's artificial gravity in VS, in that sense
I think we two are the only people on Earth that have considered that issue. Bet you 99% of the
people reading this don't get it...
However, let me say it doesn't matter much. While traveling, you don't need to look ahead for
obstacles; --you'd hit them before you'd see them. The only time looking out is justified is
at low speed, fighting or docking; and when you need to see forward you sit in front of a
forward facing window regardless where gravity points, or doesn't.
But in any case, there IS A.G. --I think you're right--, as you can dock into a cargo ship and go to
the bar and walk around; and I doubt very much this gravity comes from forward acceleration.

[nphillips]

Exactly. Just like in WC, gravity is a non-issue. It really does make a big difference with regard to how the ships are modeled, though, and I wanted to make sure I was on the right track (though I agree with the 2G/.5G acceleration limits)

EDIT: What repository are the existing models in? Or should I reverse-engineer them from the xmesh or whatever format was used?

[chuck_starchaser]

EDIT: What repository are the existing models in? Or should I reverse-engineer them from the xmesh or whatever format was used?

I looked for a link in the wiki and couldn't find one
Only found a wiki link to "our repos", but they were just the code repos; --trunk, and the branches. I'm sure somebody knows...
(In fact, I once asked the very same question, and somebody told me; but I don't have the link anymore.)

[Fendorin]

OK let my put my word ...
I honestly don't care if the Gravity is 0.05 or 3 or multiplied per the diameter of the moon except in lagrange point ..by incidence of solar wind.
The point i Guess for VS is as produce nice design acceptable for a futuristic purpose and making sense
the point is VS is a FICTIONAL game with Fictional creation

it's openned for imagination and creativity,
Currently the Fashion is putting Retro thruster to starship then let put retro thruster...

the point i m concerned is : the design of starship have to be clearly visible, if it's cargo the ship have to look as cargo , if it's extracting the ship have to look as a flying/floating mining unit and i won' go to the wiki manual for understand what is the purpose of this ship.
In this way i would to mention OX current design is looking great . looking vulnerable and clearly oriented for carrie Cargos.

nphillips wrote:
EDIT: What repository are the existing models in? Or should I reverse-engineer them from the xmesh or whatever format was used?I looked for a link in the wiki and couldn't find one

Only found a wiki link to "our repos", but they were just the code repos; --trunk, and the branches. I'm sure somebody knows...
(In fact, I once asked the very same question, and somebody told me; but I don't have the link anymore.)

http://vegastrike.svn.sourceforge.net/v ... k/masters/
Above is the Master repository

[nphillips]

OK let my put my word ...
I honestly don't care if the Gravity is 0.05 or 3 or multiplied per the diameter of the moon except in lagrange point ..by incidence of solar wind.
The point i Guess for VS is as produce nice design acceptable for a futuristic purpose and making sense

The "making sense" part is where I tend to disagree with most people (as does chuck). The way VS, Wing Commander, Star Wars, and Star Trek (any popular Sci-Fi franchise, really) portray space travel is ridiculous, at the least.

That being said,

the point is VS is a FICTIONAL game with Fictional creation

So I stop arguing and go with the flow

the point i m concerned is : the design of starship have to be clearly visible, if it's cargo the ship have to look as cargo , if it's extracting the ship have to look as a flying/floating mining unit and i won' go to the wiki manual for understand what is the purpose of this ship.
In this way i would to mention OX current design is looking great . looking vulnerable and clearly oriented for carrie Cargos.

And I totally agree with this. There's no air in space, no water...so why do all of our ships look like planes and boats?

A cargo ship should be a bunch of containers lashed together, with rockets on the tail end. Hell, so should a personal yacht. Or a warship. But again, this is fictional, and intended to be "artistic". So we have ships that look like planes and boats.

http://vegastrike.svn.sourceforge.net/v ... k/masters/
Above is the Master repository

Yeah, I found all of the bxfms, and chuck introduced me to UC last night. I've got what I need

[Deus Siddis]

The "making sense" part is where I tend to disagree with most people (as does chuck). The way VS, Wing Commander, Star Wars, and Star Trek (any popular Sci-Fi franchise, really) portray space travel is ridiculous, at the least.

Actually, I think the idea behind VS is game-play first and realism second, whereas the more popular and softer sci-fi universes like star trek and star wars put realism in more like tenth place on their priority list.

So if what you want to do as far as realism doesn't directly conflict with game-play or what is written about that ship on the wiki, then I would say you can probably just go for it.

And I totally agree with this. There's no air in space, no water...so why do all of our ships look like planes and boats?

Basically because a large part of the ships you see in game were done by like one artist back in 2003 or earlier, before VS had its own artstyle or any direction beyond copying the WC universe. So we have a lot of content inertia which can be very misleading, because what you see in the game isn't really what you should be seeing in the game- it is not considered canon.

So try to forget for example that the old Mule model looks like an overturned boat and just make it fit its intended role plus whatever style you end up developing for the Merchants, probably something more spacecraft like and utilitarian like the current Ox model as Fendorin pointed out.

A cargo ship should be a bunch of containers lashed together, with rockets on the tail end. Hell, so should a personal yacht. Or a warship. But again, this is fictional, and intended to be "artistic". So we have ships that look like planes and boats.

Not exactly. From the wiki it sounds like most factions take a fairly utilitarian approach, so for the most part they will always have form follow function.

So for starters you might have engines and radiators and some hull space.

But then ask what kind of roles does the ship take on.

Freighter? Then you need to add cargo spaces, perhaps modular for efficient transfer.

Logistical? Now you might have machinery for maneuvering and placing supplies, conducting heavy repairs, etc.

Warship? Now armor and a generally robust design is important. Weapons are a major consideration. Better maneuvering and in different directions besides just forward or forward and reverse and being stressed for such varied maneuvering are now considerations.

Strike-Craft? Similar to warship except with perhaps greater focus on maneuvering and perhaps some aerodynamics.

Shuttle? Now a degree of aerodynamics would be important. Like drag reduction I mean, not necessarily lift.

Recon or Command? Now exposed sensory and communication equipment might be a significant feature.

Manned? Most ships have a living pilot or crew, so ergonomics, sometimes viewports, etc. should be considered.

And then any given ship can and probably does have to some degree a combination of these intended missions, roles and design considerations, perhaps influenced in part by the strategies and technologies of the faction that created it. And then that faction also might have a slight aesthetic that sometimes influences the look, like the Highborn or Shapers as examples. So I think there's a great deal of creative variety you can have just be taking a basic engineering or hard scifi mindset with your designs.

[nphillips]

So I think there's a great deal of creative variety you can have just be taking a basic engineering or hard scifi mindset with your designs.

That's the approach I take.

It really sounds like the folks who are stepping up to work on the models (chuck, fendorin, deus, and myself?) all have similar opinions on this subject, too.

What I don't want to do, though, is insulting the prior artists by completely abandoning their work. Plus, a lot of these models are what people expect to see in VS. We could completely alienate whatever support remains by totally scrapping the existing models.

I would totally scrap the existing design for the Mule, except for the fact that it is already canonized, even if unofficially.

Who has the final authority on canon, now? That's not a call I am in any position to make.

[Fendorin]

hi Nphillips
YOu don't need autorization for remake the OX as taking the Old good designed one and reinterprete as you want
or you can a least ad detail, change the crew deck "head" (i love the rear part of the Ox especially the trhuster
I post a blen dfile recently (yesterday) with all the OX staff i leaved to every body want handle it
and if you are stuck on some point and want some body give you autoritative advise let ask me i will take the right to do it

[nphillips]

What I was hashing out last night was to make each of the ships a cargo container mover.

The Ox is the prime example of this -- each of the pods would be a cargo container we could see floating by itself, near a station (waiting to be moved, loaded, etc.)

The Mule, then, would merely be a command module that latches on to a single container. The Reindeer would likely be 4x as large, with 4 containers. Ox would be 4x again, with 16 containers (bigger than it's current size), and the Elephant would round us out with 32. Perhaps we'll scale them down....32 might be "too large."

Plus, we would have 4-5 different types of containers, so we could have a lot of different variations on the ships, as they would haul different cargoes.

However, the Wiki description of the Mule gives it a specialized role, so I was going to leave it's design alone, and start the modularized ships with the Reindeer.

[Fendorin]

The Ox is the prime example of this -- each of the pods would be a cargo container we could see floating by itself, near a station (waiting to be moved, loaded, etc.)

The Mule, then, would merely be a command module that latches on to a single container. The Reindeer would likely be 4x as large, with 4 containers. Ox would be 4x again, with 16 containers (bigger than it's current size), and the Elephant would round us out with 32. Perhaps we'll scale them down....32 might be "too large."

Plus, we would have 4-5 different types of containers, so we could have a lot of different variations on the ships, as they would haul different cargoes.

I little bit wonder about something too much similar between all this ship ( look at Forsaken Catfish which have some similar idea)

But let stop Blabla.... and see your Reindeer first before taping to much word about something maybe similar in our mind

Thanks

[Deus Siddis]

What I don't want to do, though, is insulting the prior artists by completely abandoning their work.

That is probably unavoidable though, given how much has changed since the early 2000's days of VS that many of these models are from. The old versus new Unadorned ships are a striking example of this. So my fear with direct successors of the oldest ships would be that they would eventually get tossed out as well for the same canon violations.

Plus, a lot of these models are what people expect to see in VS. We could completely alienate whatever support remains by totally scrapping the existing models.

Since there are so many ships out there that don't have models at all, the way of getting around this issue in the past has been to use the replaced model for a different ship that doesn't yet have a model at all. Assuming the model isn't so old that it is totally obsolete.

If a replacement model is simply well done technically though, you don't usually get more than one or two minor complaints, because is just looks so much better in general, versus something from 5 or 10 years ago.

I would totally scrap the existing design for the Mule, except for the fact that it is already canonized, even if unofficially.

The current Mule model is fairly generic looking, so I think we could just use it for another ship as mentioned above. There's a gazillion shuttles, sublight, non-jump, light transport and other sorts of craft it would fit very well as, methinks.

You could also take some vague hints from its current design that mesh with its intended purpose as a mass produced medium transport often used by the military for logistics. Like maybe its stout APC like build.

[nphillips]

For the time being, I'm continuing with the Mule, as-is...mostly to get myself back into the swing of Blendering. Using an existing design as a reference helps speed the process.

But, for now, I'd like to drop the prior discussion, and push us a bit more into Who and What the ISMG is. Answering these issues will ultimately help determine what ships they use, as well as what they look like.

• Organization
  • Are they merely a political group, or a full-fledged company?
    I say they're political/social, based upon the other factions. They're just so damn large that they need to be counted among the great powers.
  • What do they do?
    Their primary function is to provide safe, secure, and guaranteed transporting of goods throughout the Galaxy. There are two sides to their service: a) Full-time transport contracts with corporations. X product will be produced at Y rate, and The Guild will always take it to location Z. b) One-time transport of specific good, from location A to B.
  • Are their ships one-time hires through fixers and message boards, or are they long-term hires?
    From the perspective of the wiki, I think it's both. They pay for and maintain their own ships, pilots, and crews, but also maintain a secondary fleet of freelancers. The player falls into the freelancer category. As such, he only receives some of the benefits of membership, has to provide his own ship, and is paid per-mission. These sort of requests would be one-off shipments and things the guild doesn't find profitable enough to give up one of their full-time crews.
• Ships
  • What ships belong to The Guild? Are they unique?
    The currently assigned ships, per the Wiki, are originally designed by the guild. They are not unique to the Guild, however, as they probably have a division devoted to ship sales; both new and used. Guild-designed ships, however, are probably designed differently than the publicly sold ones; like Milspec. The Guild also purchases externally produced ships, particularly fighters, but also including small capacity freighters and shuttles.
  • Where do they come from?
    A combination of locations: Their large transports are designed and built in-house, and are optimized for their jobs. Combat ships and smaller more specialized vessels are acquired externally from other producers or factions.
  • What do they look like?
    I think the larger transports, like the Ox, are entirely modular. Different materials require different containers, and a one-size-fits-all approach is horribly inefficient at these scales. Right now, I'm guessing at five or six different container types, with a uniform docking and latch system, so that they can be quickly and interchanged. Smaller transports, on the other hand, can take any form -- universal, or specialized. The larger, modular ships would effectively be a command module with giant thrusters, with a spine that the containers are attached to. As a result, they would have little to no armor, and would be very spartan in their design. The smaller transports would probably be equally sparse, but could sport their own armor. (this can also give us a happy medium between more realistic ships like the Ox and artsy ones like the Mule)

[Deus Siddis]

I would say that is a good assessment overall, the only place that doesn't seem to fit entirely to me is this distinction here-

The smaller transports would probably be equally sparse, but could sport their own armor. (this can also give us a happy medium between more realistic ships like the Ox and artsy ones like the Mule)[/i][/list][/list]

I think it is reasonable to assume that the relative sizes of these ships correspond in a rough way to the relative sizes of the animals they are named after. So the only ships smaller than the Ox are the Reindeer and Mule. But quoting the wiki, the Reindeer is "Unarmed. Optimized strictly for cargo transfer. Will flee or surrender," so that probably isn't a well armored ship at all.

Perhaps instead there is a distinct between the skeletal-looking civilian container transports and the sturdy-looking military application vessels, the Mule and Clydesdale, which have a similar style to each other already.

[chuck_starchaser]

OT:
Spiritplumber once implemented "courier" missions for WCU. They kicked in if you had a small but fast ship.
That is, the mission generator was keyed to the type of ship you owned. Just to say it CAN be done...
I'm thinking, if the player buys a big cargo but harmless ship, the mission generator could be made to
taylor missions to you that boil down to safe route transporting. If you get a well armored ship, then the
mission generator could give you riskier missions, like supplying military vessels ("tender").
/OT

[nphillips]

I would say that is a good assessment overall, the only place that doesn't seem to fit entirely to me is this distinction here-

The smaller transports would probably be equally sparse, but could sport their own armor. (this can also give us a happy medium between more realistic ships like the Ox and artsy ones like the Mule)[/i][/list][/list]

I think it is reasonable to assume that the relative sizes of these ships correspond in a rough way to the relative sizes of the animals they are named after. So the only ships smaller than the Ox are the Reindeer and Mule. But quoting the wiki, the Reindeer is "Unarmed. Optimized strictly for cargo transfer. Will flee or surrender," so that probably isn't a well armored ship at all.

Perhaps instead there is a distinct between the skeletal-looking civilian container transports and the sturdy-looking military application vessels, the Mule and Clydesdale, which have a similar style to each other already.

I don't think I communicated that portion as well.

We're thinking the same thing...I think.

In my head, I was keeping the Mule and Clydesdale in their current semi-military roles. Where the Ox carries 8 containers, the Reindeer would have 2-4. Other smaller ships could be crafted, in order to fill specific niche roles. Stuff like a small, insanely fast shuttle for priority courier packages, or personnel shuttles like intergalactic buses. These ships may or may not be designed by the Guild.

As for the Clydesdale...

This is the only true warship produced by the Merchant Guild's shipyards.
The Clydesdale specifications were designed by a Confederation committee, and many critics consider it lucky that it's at least still a horse and not a camel, if not the horse everyone really wants to have to bet on.
Despite their shortcomings, many Clydesdale class vessels have been produced, and are still being constructed. Due to the manner of its Confederation genesis, the Clydesdale design is available to all Confederation members, many of which prefer to purchase Clydesdales over attempting to begin their own cruiser development programs.
link: http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/media ... Clydesdale

I don't get why the Guild would be producing a warship. It doesn't make practical sense, even if it was given to them by a Confederation committee. Perhaps it's supposed to be a large-ish freighter that's able to defend itself? Something that carries a lot of precious cargo, and needs more than a few fighters as escort? But the inclusion of heavy offensive weapons baffles me. The Merchants are not a militant group. (Are they???)

OT:
Spiritplumber once implemented "courier" missions for WCU. They kicked in if you had a small but fast ship.
That is, the mission generator was keyed to the type of ship you owned. Just to say it CAN be done...
I'm thinking, if the player buys a big cargo but harmless ship, the mission generator could be made to
taylor missions to you that boil down to safe route transporting. If you get a well armored ship, then the
mission generator could give you riskier missions, like supplying military vessels ("tender").
/OT

Good to know. That's a great implementation, and we should take advantage of it. Do you know if it's based on ships in your fleet, or the one you're currently flying?

[chuck_starchaser]

The MG are not a militant group, AFAIK, but to whatever extent the military may subcontract to
them the supplying of fleets at the front lines, the MG need to carry a big stick to get there.
That's my take.

As for your last question, no idea.

[Deus Siddis]

As for the Clydesdale...

This is the only true warship produced by the Merchant Guild's shipyards.
The Clydesdale specifications were designed by a Confederation committee, and many critics consider it lucky that it's at least still a horse and not a camel, if not the horse everyone really wants to have to bet on.
Despite their shortcomings, many Clydesdale class vessels have been produced, and are still being constructed. Due to the manner of its Confederation genesis, the Clydesdale design is available to all Confederation members, many of which prefer to purchase Clydesdales over attempting to begin their own cruiser development programs.
link: http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/media ... Clydesdale

I don't get why the Guild would be producing a warship. It doesn't make practical sense, even if it was given to them by a Confederation committee. Perhaps it's supposed to be a large-ish freighter that's able to defend itself? Something that carries a lot of precious cargo, and needs more than a few fighters as escort? But the inclusion of heavy offensive weapons baffles me. The Merchants are not a militant group. (Are they???)

I think it is there partially for enforcing their own ends, but mostly as a product. That's probably why its a cruiser and not a corvette or frigate or such- smaller factions already build those themselves, so the only thing they'd want to buy is a ship of this large size and role.

Still, this ship doesn't seem that well thought out in-game. It is insanely big, expensive, immobile, fragile and poorly armed. Its only practical game-play use is as a makeshift super carrier, if that. IMO, it really needs a rethinking or rebalancing overhaul.

[nphillips]

The MG are not a militant group, AFAIK, but to whatever extent the military may subcontract to
them the supplying of fleets at the front lines, the MG need to carry a big stick to get there.
That's my take.

That actually fits well with the reasoning for the confederation's involvement in it's design.

I think it is there partially for enforcing their own ends, but mostly as a product. That's probably why its a cruiser and not a corvette or frigate or such- smaller factions already build those themselves, so the only thing they'd want to buy is a ship of this large size and role.

I'm not sure what you mean by enforcing their own ends as a product. Product of what? They produce transportation of goods. I think they're relatively safe in their ability to ship things within human-controlled territories, because it's implied that everyone uses them. Piss off the ISMG, and you suddenly stop receiving food shipments. (we have pirates and such, which warrant escorts; but I think most of the human factions would be neutral if not friendly toward them)

But as a blockade runner, and heavily-armed transport aimed at warzone drop offs, it makes sense.

Still, this ship doesn't seem that well thought out in-game. It is insanely big, expensive, immobile, fragile and poorly armed. Its only practical game-play use is as a makeshift super carrier, if that. IMO, it really needs a rethinking or rebalancing overhaul.

Exactly. The wiki describes it as powerful...in-game it's not.

Perhaps have it bristling with defensive cannons, and some big-ass thrusters...move quick, unleash a barrage of cover fire, and get through the jump before the torpedoes can get through....

[Deus Siddis]

I'm not sure what you mean by enforcing their own ends as a product. Product of what?

Sorry I wasn't being clear, I meant those as two separate statements. On one hand the Guild can use its Clydesdales to protect their business in systems that are poorly patrolled by the military or militias.

But I think the main purpose of producing the Clydesdale is simply to sell it to factions like the Purists or Highborn or Shapers, who don't produce their own heavy warships because they are too costly. So basically the Guild runs a side business as a military weapons contractor, building and selling Clydesdale cruisers using their vast infrastructure of heavy shipworks, that they have already established for constructing their fleets of thousands of super freighters like the Ox or Elephant.

But as a blockade runner, and heavily-armed transport aimed at warzone drop offs, it makes sense.

Perhaps have it bristling with defensive cannons, and some big-ass thrusters...move quick, unleash a barrage of cover fire, and get through the jump before the torpedoes can get through....

Something like that might be better, but it would also have to be a lot smaller. There's just nothing quick or agile about 2 kilometers of armored hull.